Sometimes the fish in the barrel deserve to die

[alohacyberian]

WEAKEN NATIONAL SECURITY.

CALEA even directs cable TV companies to restructure themselves for spying.
What??? Why does the government want to see traffic BEFORE it reaches the
Internet or public telephone networks?


CALEA will give the FBI "legal" domestic listening posts.

: The Washington Post Magazine, June 23 1996
: "Government surveillance, terrorism and the U.S. Constitution"
: from Main Justice, by Jim McGee and Brian Duffy, 1996, ISBN 0-684-81135-9
:
: The FBI is growing in tandem with the NSA. With the help of the National
: Security Agency, the U.S. eavesdropping bureaucracy that spans the globe,
: the FBI operates a super-secret facility in New York code-named Megahut
: that is linked to the other FBI listening posts.
:
: After the OKC bombing, Janet Reno and Louis Freeh asked Congress to raise
: to 3,000 the number of FBI agents working counter-intelligence and counter-
: terrorism.
:
: With the new legislation, the funding for just the FBI's counter-intelli-
: gence/terror goals is now ONE BILLION DOLLARS a year, and their activities
: will rise to a LEVEL HIGHER THAN AT ANY TIME DURING THE COLD WAR.

1984 means a constant State of War.


Here's a new war: "cyberwar".

# "Head of CIA Plans Center To Protect Federal Computers"
# By Tim Weiner, The New York Times, 6/26/96
#
# John Deutc

[Thomas?]

* who did were LESS LIKELY TO INJURE VICTIMS than robbers who didn't show
* guns.
*
* The FBI has a tendency to worry people unnecessarily, even when it has
* good news. For example, last year the FBI announced that 53 percent of
* all homicides were by strangers, and that for the first time all Americans
* had a "realistic" chance of being murdered.
*
* But to arrive at these troubling figures, the FBI considered ALL UNSOLVED
* HOMICIDES, including drug-related killings, as homicides committed by
* strangers, thus creating the impression that murder was becoming
* increasingly random. "Three Strikes" laws also skew the statistics.

----


http://www.epic.org...Louis Freeh, banging the Drums of War:


Prepared Statement of
Director Louis J. Freeh
Federal Bureau of Investigation
Before the Senate Judiciary Committee

June 4, 1997

THE ISSUES YOU AND THE OTHER MEMBERS RAISE ARE CRITICAL AND IMMEDIATE.
MANY GO TO THE CORE OF THE FBI AND OUR ABILITY TO PROTECT THE AMERICAN
PEOPLE. TO ADDRESS THESE VITAL ISSUES --- SERIOUS CRIME, TERRORISM AND

[alohacyberian]

o Find out costs for health insurance for the company (Ongoing).
o Test program and relay any changes to <name> [a company]
o Finish systems matrix pricing
o Get pricing on ISDN lines for Fishkill and Bayside

It seems like this could possibly be distracting him from being "all he
could be" at XXX XXXXXX XXXXXX. Mr. Busy requests the others to "check
your email every few hours", and "do not leave before you talk to me".


The email recipient is a Fred XXXXXXX, who works at PEI,
"Tel: (718) nnn-nnnn, Fax: (718) nnn-nnnn".

Another referenced person, "Gary", has the skills/job for making brochures.
Gary has an email name of "xxxxxxx.xxxxxxxxxxx" at ISP ATT.
He receives a copy of Mr. Busy's email via Fred, might work at PEI too.
They also have a database programmer, possibly Fred.

Enclosed trailing are the actual emails.

Prepared by Guy on 10/30/96.

*******************************************************************************
*******************************************************************************
*******************************************************************************
[final snip]








:Date: Mon, 6 May 96 18:02:24 EDT
:From: guy
:To: ***@sbi
:Subject: Bob Brain report
:Cc: <others>

This is a report on the Internet traffic of Bob Brain.

The Internet is a public wire, which Salomon is obligated
to monitor for security/comp

[alohacyberian]

fired themselves.

It's weird when you're on the controlling side: I almost started putting
skull stickers on my terminal for each 'kill'. Thought it would be funny.


(Real Country Song Title:)

I'm Just A Bug On The Windshield Of Life
----------------------------------------

Tom and Linda were driving their car behind Lorena Bobbit on
the day she cut her husband's penis off. When she threw it out
the window, it hit Tom's windshield.

Tom turned the windshield wipers on, cleared the mess, turned
to Linda and said, "Did you see the dick on that bug?"



For the past two years on Wall Street, I have monitored
employee Internet email, using homegrown snarf code.

Monitored by keyword spotting software with keyword spotting exclusion logic.

I call this software: the Internet Risk Management Analytics.

The NSA calls theirs DICTIONARY.

The results of monitoring were stunning.

Absolutely stunning.


If you would like a full copy of the tail, email me with Subject line "Request
Monitoring Tale". It is in the form of a complaint against Salomon Brothers.

I went public with it after the five attempts to handle the problem internal
to Salomon failed, and then the SEC failed to even contact me about the
complaint.

Anyway, I take advantage of the screwed up situation to explain to you what
it means to be monitored by powerful keyword monitoring software.

All company names are real.

All people's names in security incident reports are changed, as are any
proprietary data/numbers.

Any personal-personal traffic (the person's own words with outside friends)
is changed so it is not the actual traffic that went across, but it will have
the same visceral-word impact as the original.

Picture yourself inside a company. Y

[Idie]

isn't it? It's 1997 now: same as it
ever was. And his imprisonment had the same slimy quality as the vicious
attack on Qubilah Shabazz, whom the government at first claimed they
"had enough on her to put her away for 90 years".


And just how do domestic civil rights organizations get labelled terrorist
or under the influence of foreign agents? Why was Qubilah Shabazz's father
considered a terrorist?

: "Secret and Sanctioned: Covert Operations and the American Presidency"
: by Stephen F. Knott, 1996, ISBN 0-19-510098-0
:
: Both presidents Johnson and Nixon had been convinced that Communist
: nations were bankrolling or directing the antiwar movement and had
: ordered investigations into this possibility.
:
: The CIA's investigations, which included operation CHAOS, found no
: evidence of external control or funding of the antiwar movement, the
: Black Panthers, or the Students for a Democratic Society.

* "The Rise of the Computer State", David Burnham, 1984
*
* p128: Federal authorities were concerned that foreign governments MIGHT
* try to influence civil rights leaders in the United States. The list
* of Americans monitored ballooned as political groups, celebrities and
* ordinary citizens were added to the 'watch lists'. The NSA surveillance
* was illegal and was instantly stopped [years later] when it appeared
* that Congress might learn about the eavesdropping.

Fear, loathing, suspicion and monitoring of civil rights movements.

All it took was the thought that foreigners were influencing Americans.

That's all it took to make the massive

[Olin Murrell]

there was a manager under heavy stress, who was pissed at top management,
knew his department had a good chance of getting cut in the next several
months, then the talk turned to guns...

This was a very long diatribe; only a little is shown here because I got
tired re-writing the words so it's not literally their traffic anymore.

In email he sounded like a major flake. In person he sounded normal.

***************** BEGIN OF JOBTALK EXCERPT *******************************

An oddity: a Xxxxx Yyyyyyy is getting stressed out by his area's upcoming
personnel cuts; he's made a presentation to Mr. Cheese for project ideas
that might avoid him being cut. This stress is normal, but suddenly talk
about him being a gun-nut came up. It doesn't appear to be a problem, but
I thought I'd let y'all decide for yourselves. ---guy

First, I am having a real bad day. I am dealing with it well though.
In fact I admire myself for it. In the past several weeks I've begun
to respect myself highly for putting up with all the obstacle

[Idie]

Mr. Hogshire was arrested for possession of dried poppy pods which can be
: bought in most any florist's shop or craft store.
:
: The charges have finally been dropped.
:
: Prosecution is so rare his story made the cover of Harper's magazine.
:
: One police officer told him:
:
: "With what you write, weren't you expecting this?"


* "Project L.U.C.I.D.", by Texe Marrs, 1996, ISBN 1-884302-02-5
*
* Individuals who have been arrested and their property seized will then be
* transported with other dissidents to a Federal Prison Transfer Center for
* proper "categorization" and "disposition."
*
* Entire families are to be disposed of in this manner. Final disposition,
* when deemed appropriate, will be made at a regional Processing and
* Detention Center. Other countries have called these 'concentration camps'
* and 'gulags'.
*
* At these "Centers," methods and techniques of interrogation, torture and
* final disposition honed and developed by the CIA and Special Forces Green
* Berets through their 'Operation Phoenix' program are to be used on
* victimized citizens.
*
* Operation Phoenix, during the Vietnam conflict, was responsible for the
* arrest, incarceration, torture and murder of over 50,000 innocent civilians.
*
* The CIA and U.S. Army acclaimed it a success and a model for future "human
* pacification" programs.


* http://ursula.blythe.org/NameBase
*
* Valentine, Douglas. The Phoenix Program. New York: William Morrow, 1990.
* 479 pages.
*
* Operation Phoenix
*
* Along with saturation bombing o

[Olin Murrell]

retained the ability
* to break the codes of anyone using the machines.
*
* Thus, Fort Meade was able to listen in on the coded military and
* diplomatic traffic of the more than 130 countries that were Crypto
* A.G. customers.


Initially, the NSA tried to say they couldn't decrypt Key Recovery
impaired traffic on the fly:

! The New York Times, December 29, 19??, by David Burnham
! "Vast Coding of Data is Urged to Hamper Electronic Spies"
!
! Because the National Security Agency is actively involved in the
! design [of Key Recovery cryptography], the agency will have the
! technical ability to decipher the messages.
!
! Walter G. Deeley, NSA deputy director for communications security
! said, "It is technically possible for the Government to read such
! messages, but it would be insane for it to do so. It would be an
! extraordinarily expensive undertaking and would require a massive
! increase in computer power."

Probably since noone believed that, they admitted it, and said why they
needed to decrypt in real-time:

#

[Olin Murrell]

government can intrinsically wiretap it.
Also called the FBI Digital Telephony Act. It is a domestic
extension of ECHELON.

GAK - Government Access [to cryptographic] Keys. Any cryptography
product with GAK has been compromised so the government can
read it.

SIGINT - Signals Intelligence = NSA = electronic snooping

Key Recovery - See GAK.

C-SPAN - Two cable channels dedicated to broadcasting both houses of
Congress and other U.S. governmental functions.

DEA - U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration
DIA - U.S. Pentagon Defense Intelligence Agency
DIA - U.S. Drug Interdiction Agency (older)

FBI - U.S. Federal Bureau of Investigation

BATF - U.S. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms

UKUSA - pronounced 'you-koo-za' - a secret wartime treaty that says
member nations can spy on each others population without
warrants or limits, and that this can be shared with the
spied-on country's SIGINT agency.

PGP - Free and unbreakable encryption, available world-wide.

CISPES - Committee in Solidarity with the People of El Salvador


"Ultra-secret" agencies:

NSA - U.S. National Security Agency

GCHQ - British Government Communications Headquarters

CSE - Canada's Communications Security Establishment

DSD - Australian Defense Signals Directorate

GCSB - New Zealand's Government Communications Security Bureau



******************************************************************************

Main()
----


Using mainly publicly available material, here is my documentation of:


o Part 1: Massive Domestic Spying via NSA ECHELON

This is highly detailed documentation of NSA spying.
This spying

[Olin Murrell]

the overseas
* communications of a number of individuals engaged in organizing
* political protests against the war in Vietnam were subjected to
* surveillance by the NSA equipment.


Mini-recap:

o The NSA can listen in on all American citizens' border-crossing
communications of any sort without a warrant or any other court
procedure, and effectively distribute that information to any and
all local law-enforcement agencies. And foreign governments.

Loss of Fourth Amendment rights.

Not even discussed with the American public.

Not even debated by our elected representatives.

o Domestic law enforcement agencies can request, receive, and widely
disseminate this information without any laws interfering. A major
blurring of the lines between Military and civilian control.

o Requests for political reasons are acceptable. (last paragraph)

o The NSA uses a huge number of computers to listen for "key words"
on "watch lists" for ALL border crossing traffic, including voice
conversations. That means in 1975 they could convert voice to text,
then do keyword searches against it. It's 1997 now.

Just how did United States citizens lose these Fourth Amendment rights,
granted by the Constitution? And why is the Military monitoring the
communications of Americans on U.S. soil and working with domestic law
enforcement?

Well, one day President Truman issued a secret order creating the NSA.

As testified by Library of Congress members on C-SPAN, the names of these
presidential findings change with administrations. They are called variously
Presidential Decision Directives, National Security Council Decision
Directives, Executive Orders, etc.

One might think these special override-the-constitution presidential
directives (which came out of nowhere) would be used for short-term
emergencies.

Wrong: the NSA is now a HUGE intelligence organization, eating billions
and billion

[Olin Murrell]

Palace, Author James Bamford, 1983 revision
*
* Infested by moles and potential defectors for more than twelve of its
* first fifteen years, NSA managed the distinction of not only becoming
* the most secretive and most hidden member of America's growing
* intelligence consortium, but also the most thoroughly penetrated.
*
*
*
* The NSA began a McCarthy-type purge, and dozens of NSA employees
* suspected of homosexuality were forced to resign or were fired.
*
* Since then, any hint of homosexual behaviour resulted in either
* the person's not being hired or, if the fact is revealed later,
* being forced to resign.
*
* Any man exhibiting the slightest effeminacy became an instant suspect.
* The Office of Security was on full alert for limp wrists and telltale
* lisps.
*
* During his security clearance polygraph test, Mitchell told his
* interrogator about certain "sexual experimentation" with dogs
* and chickens he had done when he was between the ages of thirteen
* and nineteen.
*
* The Agency's Office of Security thought about it for a week, then issued
* him his security clearance to work at the National Security Agency.





Parting shot #2

!!! Congressional testimony of FBI informer Frank Varelli:
!!!
!!! "I was told that the Bureau wanted to get an apartment.
!!!
!!! So I could seduce the head of the CISPES group.
!!!
!!! Her name is Linda Hay and is one of the most outsp

[Olin Murrell]

Lastname #13" out of the Firm.
Notify his manager...

The people are:

Firstname Lastname #1
Firstname Lastname #2
Firstname Lastname #3
Firstname Lastname #4
Firstname Lastname #5
Firstname Lastname #6
Firstname Lastname #7
Firstname Lastname #8
Firstname Lastname #9
Firstname Lastname #10
Firstname Lastname #11
Firstname Lastname #12
Firstname Lastname #13


Prepared by Guy on N/NN/NN.

******************************************************************************
******************************************************************************
******************************************************************************


Person #1
: @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
: File: <snip> Size: 1,893 Date: N/NN/NN
: from <Mary lastname>
: rcpt <Cathy lastname>
: Subject: re: fw: humor -forwarded -reply
: Hey Cathy-
: Okay so far. I'm thinking of changing my job. I'm interviewing with
: Morgan Stanley soon.
: [snip]
: miss you,
: Mary
: @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
: File: <snip> Size: 1,968 Date: N/NN/NN
: from <Mary lastname>
: rcpt <Cathy lastname>
: Subject: re: ?
: You're doing fine I'll bet. Myself: I am going to switch jobs again.
: A better offer was given to me by Morgan Stanley, and I'm contemplating
: it. Currently, I've bee

[Olin Murrell]

Eye: Contact!", Information Week magazine, June 3 1996
#
# Computer passwords may be a thing of the past using a scanner that maps
# over 400 identifying features of your iris. The system will be tested at
# ATMs in Columbus, Ohio later this year. The company has been inundated
# with calls from other industries interested in using the technology.

And what about head shots of people...any 'machine vision' deals there?

* "New System Lets Computer Identify Pictures and Images"
* The New York Times, By John Holusha, [I failed to date the article clipping]
*
* New technology that may help solve one of the thorniest problems in computer
* science---teaching machines to recognize pictures--- was announced yesterday
* by officials of the David Sarnoff Research Center in Princeton, NJ. "We are
* going to make a business out of this", said IS VP Curtis R. Carlson. "It
* does things on a personal computer that used to require a supercomputer."

# "FBI Setting Standards for Computer Picture File of Criminals", NYT, 11/5/95
#
# A meeting called "Mug Shot and Facial Image Standards Conference" was held
# to set facial image standards. The standards will take into account
# emerging technologies like software that determines if two facial images
# belong to the same person, even from composite sketches.

Yep. Even using photographs. More on this later.

----

And what does a National ID Card with a Universal Biometric identifier mean?

A number (that is: scanned fingerprint or iris) that cannot be faked.

Unprecedented possibilities for control of the presumed guilty popu

[jakdedert]

--as well you know.
I waited patiently,
And soon I heard dear Grandmama
Calling aloud for me.


"Open the door for Puss," said she;
I sprang upon her knee;
Then, quite out loud, she kindly read
Your lovely note to me.


And all the while I purred and purred,
Or softly said, "Mew, mew";
With grown-up people in the room
'Twas all that I could do


To show how, at each friendly word,
My cat's heart swelled with pride;
And yet some sadness came therewith,
The news that you had cried.



I did not cry--in Cat-dom we
Don't think it etiquette
To wash our faces when we grieve,
And make our whiskers wet.


Yet none the less I truly shared
The sadness of the house;
I think 'twas a whole week before
I'd heart to catch a mouse.


I even thought the cream was sour,
I lost my appetite,
I caterwauled upon the roof
So dismally at night


That spiteful neighbour Green sent in
(He's a low taste for dogs)--
And begged that Grandmama would put
My feet in walnut clogs!


I grew morose, I spat at John,
Put up my back at Jane,
But your kind letter makes me feel
A happy cat again.



When you come back in Spring, I'll learn
To count my paws, and you
Perhaps might condescend to try
A few things I can do.


Your way of climbing up a wall
Strikes me as not--the thing,
And though you're nimble, you might take
A lesson how to spring.


What's more, if you are not above
Hearing a cat's advice,
In time you might be brought to feel
More justly about mice.


You've hurt my feeli

[Boston Blackie]

on my slate?
I believe there is no other
In all the picture-books--at any rate
None so beautiful as Mother.

THE SNOW QUEEN

WHERE the wild bear clasps the ice
Over the hanging precipice,
Where the glittering icebergs shine
Within the sunset, red as wine,
Where the reindeer lick the snow,
To see what there may be below,
Where the shades are blue and green,
There lives, they say, the great Snow Queen.


Wild her eyes are as the sea
When northern winds blow lustily.
Her queenly robes are white as snow,
But flaming diamonds on them glow,
And many a precious stone.
Of green ice builded is her throne:
Polar bears her watch-dogs are--
Her only lamp, an evening star.

TWILIGHT

THE shadows deepen so you cannot see
Within the corners of the nursery;
Across the ceiling dim they dance and leap,
And stealthily along the floor they creep,
Only the teacups standing on the table
Bear each a shining fleck, a red fire label.
THE LITTLE BROWN DWARF

IT WAS the mother Margaret,
To her daughter fair she said:
"Come now, my child, and listen to me,
Come stand beside my bed.


"No father thou, nor brother hast,
Thine uncle is hard and cruel,
Though he have wealth and we be poor,
Nor bread he gives nor fuel.


"But go tho

[John Dey]

STAND STILL AND WATCH

STAND still and watch the clock's grave face,
The hands go round an even pace,
The hands go round, and though so slow,
In vain we try to see them go!
But watch that long black hand again,
Did you not see it moving then
In tiny jerks from space to space?


O bright moon rising full and round,
I watch you leave the level ground--
You pass the tops of houses, trees,
I see you mounting over these;
The stars themselves your progress prove--
In vain I watch to see you move--
No single jerk, as yet, I've found!

BIRTHDAYS

WHEN birthdays come, we always write
Our names upon the nursery door,
And carefully we mark the height,
Each standing shoeless on the floor.


How strange to think birthdays will be
When we shall never add one more
To all those marks which gradually
Are climbing up the nursery door!

WINTER

ONE late November eve I stood
Beneath an old oak tree,
And every one of its yellow leaves
Said something sad to me.
"We're tired, we're old," they moaned, "and the wind
Pinches us cruelly!"


The fields looked very bare and still;
The river rippling near
A word to the willows whispered
That made them quake for fear,
While every withered blade of grass
Hung heavy with a tear.


The cattle crouched beneath the hedge;
The poor sheep never stirred;


fest shelter of the wood
Sat silent every bird;
Only the rooks, in flying home,
Made their hoarse voices heard.


I thought the Vale--so smiling once--
In anger seemed to frown,
And wondering what this meant, I looked

[alohacyberian]

And tinkling bell.


But ah! why is it that one goes so lame
Across the grass,--
What greedy little boy have we to blame?
Alas, alas!


Then fell Thialfi on his trembling knees,
"Oh, Sir," he cried,
"I broke the bone, but oh, forgive me, please!"
Kind Thor replied:



"Since you have told the truth, nor tried to lie,
You shall go free."
A lesson to us all in "wondering why,"
Then let this be.

RESPONSIBILITY

EACH thought I think, each little word I say,
Goes travelling outwards far and far away,
And like a bottle drifting on the sea,
None know whereat its landing-place will be.
THE RAINBOW

CAN that fairy place be found
Where the rainbow touches ground?
Will you tell me, driver, pray,
Is it many miles away?


Somewhere there must be a spot
Shining like a coloured blot,
Pink and purple, blue and green,
Like a transformation scene.


What must all the cattle think
When the grass and flowers turn pink?
Woolly sheep, what do you do
When the daisied field shines blue?


Happy must those children be,
Who the rainbow's end can see,
Who can play and dance and sing
In the rainbow's shining ring!

[rob]

has just been taken ill,
He ate too many ices, too much cake--
I've come to ask the doctor for a pill
Nasty enough to cure his stomach-ache!"
RHYS AT THE FAIRY DANCE

RHYS and David hastened home,
For the night was well-nigh come,
And their tired and heavy tread
Woke the birds who'd gone to bed.


The tired moon leaned on the hill,
Tired, the soft wind had grown still,
Bats and beetles were about,
And the stars peeped shyly out,


When Rhys stopped and said, "Why, hark!
Who is singing like a lark?
Listen! for more joyful things
Never woke from fiddle-strings!


"It were madness to pass by
Such a sweet festivity.
Dance I must, and dance I will--
Go you, David, up the hill!"



"Stay!" cried David, struck with fear,
"There's no music in my ear--
I hear nothing but the call
Of you valley's waterfall!"


Ah! too late, poor Rhys was gone;
David shouted, but went on.
When in bed, uneasy dreams
Crossed his sleep with evil gleams.


David saw Rhys al

[rob]

NIGHT

NIGHT like a coverlet is folded down
Upon the hills, and now the gentle trees
Rock in their arms the restless winds to sleep.
Cassiopeia, the Great Bear, and the Crown
Divide the sky with striding Hercules.
Her silent watch the pointed moon doth keep;
I, in my cosy bed, lie still and wonder
What makes the world turn round and stirs the thunder.
A BEETLE TALE

"O COME," the elder beetle said,
"For every one is safe in bed,
'Tis time to seek our nightly bread."
Then forth he crept with stealthy tread.


The clock ticked on--you would not deem
Aught could have broke that peace supreme,
The children slept, they scarce did dream,
The young moon cast a fitful gleam.


From crack and cranny beetles crept;
In black and polished coats they stept
Upon that floor, which Jane had swept.
Ah me! how fast those children slept!


The elder beetle scratched his head
And thought a moment--then he said:
"Follow me, children, and be fed."
Forth to the larder door he led.



The Cook turned in her sleep--too late!
She should have covered with a plate
The dish that none shall save from fate;
She dreams the clock is striking ei

[alohacyberian]

Who lay so cold and near to death,
Some kindness he would show.


And it was her uncle, the cruel man,
In wrath he rose and cried:
"Sooner than give thee aught, my girl,
I'd blast my own hill-side--


"Now get thee gone and come no more";
Then Lisa fled in tears,
She took the downward path towards home,
His hard words in her ears.


And it was Kastler, the little brown dwarf,
Who stood in Lisa's way,
And fast she would have fled from him,
But "Soft," he bade her, "Stay;--



"I've heard yon bad man's words," said he;
"Go to thy mother dear,
These herbs will take her ills away,
This cheese last many a year."


Then did he give her herbs and cheese,
The little kind brown dwarf!
He patted Lisa's cold blue cheek,
And skipped off with a laugh.


And it was Lisa, her little daughter,
Mother Margaret saw come in;
Soon as she tasted of the herbs
To heal she did begin.


And then good mother Margaret
She went to the cottage door,
"Good lack," she cried, "thine uncle's fields
On the hill-side are no more.


"Naught's there but rubbish and blasted rock
Where grass grew green anon!"
And it was Kastler, the little brown dwarf,
They fell a-thinking on.

SWINGING

SWING me up and swing me down,
Swing me up towards the sky--
Swinging is like being blown,
Blow me up and let me fly,
Like a piece of thistle-down--
Swing me up towards the sky!
LEFT ALONE

MY cousins are gone out to walk,
Mama is called away,
And in Aunt Mary's drawing-room
I must not romp or play.

[alohacyberian]

at them--
How odd the dancing letters seemed!
And then I rubbed my eyes and woke,
And knew that I had only dreamed!

RESOLUTIONS

LET us try to be good and content,
Kind to each other,
Healthy and gentle and brave,
Obedient to Mother.


For of such were the heroes of old--
Patient in learning,
Seldom rude, seldom cross, never cruel,
From the truth never turning.

A PENNY AND A PURSE

A PENNY murmured to a purse:
"You feel so nice and smooth and warm--
I have stayed in many worse,--
Lacking comfort, wanting charm.


"I've passed my life with all degrees,
In wondrous journeys to and fro--
And tales of hardship or of ease--
You ask a penny--he will know!


"I can tell you, Purse, my friend,
Many weary weeks I've lain--
Wondering if the need to spend,
E'er would speed me forth again!


"Then as fate would have it so,
Ten times in a single day,
I've changed owners, until, oh!
I'd have given worlds to stay.



"I've made my bed upon the floor,
In children's pockets have I slept--
And once when I was all her store
A woman, parting with me, wept.


"A silent witness I have been,
Of life and deat

[alohacyberian]

a plate
The dish that none shall save from fate;
She dreams the clock is striking eight!


But ah! not yet the night has run,
Not yet appears the morning sun--
Cook's handiwork is soon undone,
The tarts are eaten every one!

THE WAITER

BRILLIANT with mirrors, dim with crimson light,
Gorgeous with gold, with marble statues wan,--
This was our dining-room, and here upon
The velvet chairs we all sat down that night
We dined with Uncle John.


To many men the trump of battle calls,
Others in books seek their felicity,--
No blame to them, indeed, but oh to be
A gracious waiter in those shining halls
Were bliss enough for me!

A LIKENESS

A LADY in a picture once I saw
Who reminded me of Mother--
Now book and picture show me her no more,
And I cannot find another.


Then should I try to draw her on my slate?
I believe there is no other
In all the picture-books--at any rate
None so beautiful as Mother.

THE SNOW QUEEN

WHERE the wild bear clasps the ice
Over the hanging prec

[alohacyberian]

made them quake for fear,
While every withered blade of grass
Hung heavy with a tear.


The cattle crouched beneath the hedge;
The poor sheep never stirred;


fest shelter of the wood
Sat silent every bird;
Only the rooks, in flying home,
Made their hoarse voices heard.


I thought the Vale--so smiling once--
In anger seemed to frown,
And wondering what this meant, I looked
Across the fallows brown
To the far hills, and thence I saw
Old Winter coming down.


He was not very near--but well
That figure gaunt I know;
His robe was made of woven mist,
His cap of folded snow.
I heard the rattling of his bones,
With cold they shivered so.


His face was withered, stern, and pale,
His fingers long and thin,
A lantern 'neath his mantle held
The Northern Lights within;
And prisoned winds in his monstrous bag
Set up a fearful din.



The trees of the forest saw, and tossed
Their arms high in the air,
The leaves fell quivering to the ground
And left the branches bare.
The flowe

[Olin Murrell]

gleam.


From crack and cranny beetles crept;
In black and polished coats they stept
Upon that floor, which Jane had swept.
Ah me! how fast those children slept!


The elder beetle scratched his head
And thought a moment--then he said:
"Follow me, children, and be fed."
Forth to the larder door he led.



The Cook turned in her sleep--too late!
She should have covered with a plate
The dish that none shall save from fate;
She dreams the clock is striking eight!


But ah! not yet the night has run,
Not yet appears the morning sun--
Cook's handiwork is soon undone,
The tarts are eaten every one!

THE WAITER

BRILLIANT with mirrors, dim with crimson light,
Gorgeous with gold, with marble statues wan,--
This was our dining-room, and here upon
The velvet chairs we all sat down that night
We dined with Uncle John.


To many men the trump of battle calls,
Others in books seek their felicity,--
No blame to them, indeed, but oh to be
A gracious waiter in those shining halls
Were bliss enough for me!

A LIKENESS

A LADY in a picture once I saw
Who reminded me of Mother--
Now book and picture show me her no more,
And I cannot find another.


Then should I try to draw her on my slate?
I believe there is no other
In all the picture-books--at any rate
None so beautiful as Mother.

THE SNOW QUEEN

WHERE the wild bear clasps the ice
Over the hanging precipice,
Where the glittering icebergs shine
Within the sunset, red as wine,
Where the reindeer lick the snow,
To see what there may be below,
Where the shades are blue and green,
There lives, they say, the great

[Thomas?]

BENEATH THE SEA

WERE I a fish beneath the sea,
Shell-paved and pearl-brocaded,
Would you come down and live with me,
In groves by coral shaded?


No washing would we have to do;
Our cushions should be sponges--
And many a great ship's envious crew
Should watch our merry plunges!

KING FASHION

THERE was a King of England once,
I shall not tell his name,
But what this King of England thought,
The people thought the same.


All that he said they listened to,
And called it wondrous wise;
On everything in earth or heaven
They looked with courtiers' eyes.


To every one of his commands
They said, "So let it be."
There never yet a monarch was
More absolute than he.


One day within his presence-hall
Two men stood forth together--
One dressed in velvet and in gold,
The other clad in leather.



ing said to his people,
"Remember what you're told,
You may kick the man in leather,
You must kiss the man in gold."


Whilst on a country walk one day,
The King espied a frog.
"Why, here," said he, "I've found a most
Peculiar kind of dog!


"He shall have meat for breakfast,
Of milk three saucers full,
A golden collar for his neck,
And a bed of cotton-wool."
Then every courtier kept a frog
And called it a peculiar dog!
E.K.

RIVER, RIVER

RIVER, river, running through the land,
Are you a traveller over foreign sand?
Are you a carrier from town to town,
River, river, as you hurry down?


Yes, I'm a carrier from town to town:
Here are ships with white sails, there are boats with brown,
What shall they bring you, what will you send?
I'll be your carrier

[alohacyberian]

places,
Loved by the sun and breezes wild,
In memory of the winsome child.
E.K.

IN THE FIELD

SHADE me, pretty buttercup,
Lift your golden goblet up;
I am only a poor spider,
Who has no one else to hide her:
Since my house was swept away
I've been wandering all day!
THE ARM-CHAIR

"I AM gouty," said the arm-chair
To the mantelpiece and fender,
"You would scarce perhaps believe it,
But my left foot is quite tender!


"At our fancy ball last midnight
I could hardly step the lancers,
But the ladies were so pressing--
They'd not take my 'Noes' for answers!


"There was little round Miss Table,
As charming as she's pretty;
And the lovely Lady Fire Screen,--
To refuse her what a pity!


"Then my dear friend, Sophy Cushion,
In her graceful frills and flounces;
Oh what turns we've had together,
Though the spiteful say she bounces!



"But my dancing days are over,
All my days of fun and chatter;
I must be content to sit here
And discuss more solid matter."


Here the mantelpiece and fender,
By the fireside (as their choice is),
In the praise of quiet converse,
To console him raised their voices.

WHO IS THAT SINGING?

WHO is that singing up in the chimney?
Who is that whistling through the bare trees?
That is the wind who flies as he listeth,
That is the wind whom nobody sees.
THE SAILOR

THE sailor comes from over seas,
From lands where we have never been,
Where flowers are strange, and strange the trees--
Such golden fruit amongst the green!
The birds wear rainbows in their wings,
What fire and flash, what shine and sheen,
They seem too fine for mortal things!
Gay are the songs the sailor sings
When home he comes from over seas.
OLE LUK-OIE

A PICTURE hung beside my bed,
Wher

[rob]

in
Geneva in the 'sixties. Into Danish, too, it was translated shortly
after its appearance.

However much that state of things may have altered during the last
twenty-five years, the general principles laid down in the Manifesto
are, on the whole, as correct today as ever. Here and there, some detail
might be improved. The practical application of the principles will
depend, as the Manifesto itself states, everywhere and at all times, on
the historical conditions for the time being existing, and, for that
reason, no special stress is laid on the revolutionary measures proposed
at the end of Section II. That passage would, in many respects, be very
differently worded today. In view of the gigantic strides of Modern
Industry since 1848, and of the accompanying improved and extended
organization of the working class, in view of the practical experience
gained, first in the February Revolution, and then, still more, in the
Paris Commune, where the proletariat for the first time held political
power for two whole months, this programme has in some details been
antiquated. One thing especially was proved by the Commune, viz., that
"the working class cannot simply lay hold of ready-made state machinery,
and wield it for its own purposes." (See The Civil War in France:
Address of the General Council of the International Working Men's
Assocation, 1871, where this point is further developed.) Further, it is
self-evide

[Boston Blackie]

he is a
prisoner of war of the revolution in Gatchina, and Russia forms the
vanguard of revolutionary action in Europe.

"The Communist Manifesto had, as its object, the proclamation of the
inevitable impending dissolution of modern bourgeois property. But in
Russia we find, face-to-face with the rapidly flowering capitalist
swindle and bourgeois property, just beginning to develop, more than
half the land owned in common by the peasants. Now the question is: can
the Russian obshchina, though greatly undermined, yet a form of
primeaval common ownership of land, pass directly to the higher form of
Communist common ownership? Or, on the contrary, must it first pass
through the same process of dissolution such as constitutes the
historical evolution of the West?

"The only answer to that possible today is this: If the Russian
Revolution becomes the signal for a proletarian revolution in the West,
so that both complement each other, the present Russian common ownership
of land may serve as the starting point for a communist development.

"January 21, 1882 London"

At about the same date, a new Polish version appeared in Geneva:
_Manifest Kommunistyczny_.

Furthermore, a new Danish translation has appeared in the
_Socialdemokratisk Bibliothek_, Copenhagen, 1885. Unfortunately, it is
not quite complete; certain essential passages, which seem to have
presented difficulties to the translator, have been omitted, and, in
addition, there are saigns of carelessness here and there, which are all
the more unpleasantly co

[alohacyberian]

their own standpoint to
place themselves at that of the proletariat.

The "dangerous class", the social scum, that passively rotting mass
thrown off by the lowest layers of the old society, may, here and there,
be swept into the movement by a proletarian revolution; its conditions
of life, however, prepare it far more for the part of a bribed tool of
reactionary intrigue.

In the condition of the proletariat, those of old society at large are
already virtually swamped. The proletarian is without property; his
relation to his wife and children has no longer anything in common with
the bourgeois family relations; modern industry labor, modern subjection
to capital, the same in England as in France, in America as in Germany,
has stripped him of every trace of national character. Law, morality,
religion, are to him so many bourgeois prejudices, behind which lurk in
ambush just as many bourgeois interests.

All the preceding classes that got the upper hand sought to fortify
their already acquired status by subjecting society at la

[jakdedert]

property relations, and the old society, or to cramping the modern
means of production and of exchange within the framework of the old
property relations that have been, and were bound to be, exploded by
those means. In either case, it is both reactionary and Utopian.

Its last words are: corporate guilds for manufacture; patriarchal
relations in agriculture.

Ultimately, when stubborn historical facts had dispersed all
intoxicating effects of self-deception, this form of socialism ended in
a miserable hangover.

c. German or "True" Socialism

The socialist and communist literature of France, a literature that
originated under the pressure of a bourgeoisie in power, and that was
the expressions of the struggle against this power, was introduced into
Germany at a time when the bourgeoisie in that country had just begun
its contest with feudal absolutism.

German philosophers, would-be philosophers, and beaux esprits (men of
letters), eagerly seized on this literature, only forgetting that when
these writings immigrated from France into Germany, French social
conditions had not immigrated along with them. In contact with German
social conditions, this French literature lost all its immediate
practical significance and assumed a purely literary aspect. Thus, to
the German philosophers of the eighteenth century, the demands of the
first French Revolution were nothing more than the demands of "Practical
Reason" in general, and the utterance o

[Boston Blackie]

and published in Madrid,
1886. The German reprints are not to be counted; there have been twelve
altogether at the least. An Armenian translation, which was to be
published in Constantinople some months ago, did not see the light, I am
told, because the publisher was afraid of bringing out a book with the
name of Marx on it, while the translator declined to call it his own
production. Of further translations into other languages I have heard
but had not seen. Thus the history of the Manifesto reflects the history
of the modern working-class movement; at present, it is doubtless the
most wide spread, the most international production of all socialist
literature, the common platform acknowledged by millions of working men
from Siberia to California.

Yet, when it was written, we could not have called it a _socialist_
manifesto. By Socialists, in 1847, were understood, on the one hand the
adherents of the various Utopian systems: Owenites in England,
Fourierists in France, both of them already reduced to the position of
mere sects, and gradually dying out; on the other hand, the most
multifarious social quacks who, by all manner of tinkering, professed to
redress, without any danger to capital and profit, all sorts of social
grievances, in both cases men outside the working-class movement, and
looking rather to the "educated" classes for support. Whatever portion
of the working class had become convinced of the insufficiency of mere
political revolutions, and had proclaimed the necessity of total social
change, called itself Communist. It was a crude, rough-hewn, purely
instinctive sort of communism; still, it touched the cardinal point and
was powerful enough amongst the working class to produce the Utopian
communism of Cabet in France, and of Weitling in Germany. Thus, in 1847,
socialism was a middle-class movement, communism a working-class
movement. Socialism was, on the Continent at least, "respectable";
communism was the very opposite. And as our notion, fr

[alohacyberian]

out into riots.

Now and then the workers are victorious, but only for a time. The real
fruit of their battles lie not in the immediate result, but in the ever
expanding union of the workers. This union is helped on by the improved
means of communication that are created by Modern Industry, and that
place the workers of different localities in contact with one another.
It was just this contact that was needed to centralize the numerous
local struggles, all of the same character, into one national struggle
between classes. But every class struggle is a political struggle. And
that union, to attain which the burghers of the Middle Ages, with their
miserable highways, required centuries, the modern proletarian, thanks
to railways, achieve in a few years.

This organization of the proletarians into a class, and, consequently,
into a political party, is continually being upset again by the
competition between the workers themselves. But it ever rises up again,
stronger, firmer, mightier. It compels legislative recognition of
particular interests of the workers, by taking advantage of the
divisions among the bourgeoisie itself. Thus, the Ten-Hours Bill in
England was carried.

Altogether, collisions between the classes of the old society further in
many ways the course of development of the proletariat. The bourgeoisie
finds itself involved in

[John Dey]

proposition, which, in my opinion, is destined to do for history
what Darwin's theory has done for biology, we both of us, had been
gradually approaching for some years before 1845. How far I had
independently progressed towards it is best shown by my _Conditions of
the Working Class in England_. But when I again met Marx at Brussels, in
spring 1845, he had it already worked out and put it before me in terms
almost as clear as those in which I have stated it here.

From our joint preface to the German edition of 1872, I quote the
following:

"However much that state of things may have altered during the last
twenty-five years, the general principles laid down in the Manifesto
are, on the whole, as correct today as ever. Here and there, some detail
might be improved. The practical application of the principles will
depend, as the Manifesto itself states, everywhere and at all times, on
the historical conditions for the time being existing, and, for that
reason, no special stress is laid on the revolutionary measures proposed
at the end of Section II. That passage would, in many respects, be very
differently worded today. In view of the gigantic strides of Modern
Industry since 1848, and of the accompanying improved and extended
organization of the working class, in view of the practical experience
gained, first in the February Revolution, and then, still more, in the
Paris Commune, where the proletariat for the first time held political
power for two whole months, this programme has in some details been
antiquated. One thing especially was proved by the Commune, viz., that
"the working class cannot simply lay hold of ready-made state machinery,
and wield it for its own purposes." (See _The Civil War in France:
Address of the General Council of the International Working Men's
Assocation_ 1871, where th

[rob]

for the
political and intellectual history of that epoch; that consequently
(ever since the dissolution of the primaeval communal ownership of land)
all history has been a history of class struggles, of struggles between
exploited and exploiting, between dominated and dominating classes at
various stages of social evolution; that this struggle, however, has now
reached a stage where the exploited and oppressed class (the
proletariat) can no longer emancipate itself from the class which
exploits and oppresses it (the bourgeoisie), without at the same time
forever freeing the whole of society from exploitation, oppression,
class struggles -- this basic thought belongs soley and exclusively to
Marx.

[ENGELS FOOTNOTE TO PARAGRAPH: "This proposition", I wrote in the
preface to the English translation, "which, in my opinion, is destined
to do for history what Darwin's theory has done for biology, we both of
us, had been gradually approaching for some years before 1845. How far I
had independently progressed towards it is best shown by my _Conditions
of the Working Class in England_. But when I again met Marx at Brussels,
in spring 1845, he had it already worked out and put it before me in
terms almost as clear as those in which I have stated it here."]

I have already stated this many times; but precisely now is it necessary
that it also stand in front of the Manifesto itself.

FREDERICK ENGELS

June 28, 1883
London



------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[alohacyberian]

of this primitive communistic society was laid bare, in its
typical form, by Lewis Henry Morgan's (1818-1861) crowning discovery of
the true nature of the gens and its relation to the tribe. With the
dissolution of the primeaval communities, society begins to be
differentiated into separate and finally antagonistic classes. I have
attempted to retrace this dissolution in _Der Ursprung der

Familie, des Privateigenthumus und des Staats_, second edition,
Stuttgart, 1886. [Engels, 1888 English edition]

[3] Guild-master, that is, a full member of a guild, a master within,
not a head of a guild. [Engels: 1888 English edition]

[4] This was the name given their urban communities by the townsmen of
Italy and France, after they had purchased or conquered their initial
rights of self-government from their feudal lords. [Engels: 1890 German
edition]

"Commune" was the name taken in France by the nascent towns even before
they had conquered from their feudal lords and masters local
self-government and political rights as the "Third Estate". Generally
speaking, for the economical

[rob]

Europe, and especially
of England, existing up to now. Both circumstances react in a
revolutionary manner upon America itself. Step by step, the small and
middle land ownership of the farmers, the basis of the whole political
constitution, is succumbing to the competition of giant farms; at the
same time, a mass industrial proletariat and a fabulous concentration of
capital funds are developing for the first time in the industrial
regions.

And now Russia! During the Revolution of 1848-9, not only the European
princes, but the European bourgeois as well, found their only salvation
from the proletariat just beginning to awaken in Russian intervention.
The Tsar was proclaimed the chief of European reaction. Today, he is a
prisoner of war of the revolution in Gatchina, and Russia forms the
vanguard of revolutionary action in Europe.

The Communist Manifesto had, as its object, the proclamation of the
inevitable impending dissolution of modern bourgeois property. But in
Russia we find, face-to-face with the rapidly flowering capitalist
swindle and bourgeois property, just beginning to develop, more than
half the land owned in common by the peasants. Now the question is: can
the Russian obshchina, though greatly undermined, yet a form of
primeaval common ownership of land, pass directly to the higher form of
Communist common ownership? Or, on the contrary, must it first pass
through the same process of dissolution such as constitutes the
historical evolution of the West?

The only answer to that possible today is this: If the Russian
Revolution becomes the signal for a proletarian revolution in the West,
so that both complement each other, the present Russian common ownership
of land may serve as the starting point for a communist development.

KARL MARX

FREDERICK ENGELS January 21, 1882
London



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

PREFACE TO 1883 GERMAN EDITION

---------------------------------------

[alohacyberian]

TO 1882 RUSSIAN EDITION

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The first Russian edition of the Manifesto of the Communist Party,
translated by Bakunin, was published early in the 'sixties by the
printing office of the Kolokol. Then the West could see in it (the
Russian edition of the Manifesto) only a literary curiosity. Such a view
would be impossible today.

What a limited field the proletarian movement occupied at that time
(December 1847) is most clearly shown by the last section: the position
of the Communists in relation to the various opposition parties in
various countries. Precisely Russia and the United States are missing
here. It was the time when Russia constituted the last great reserve of
all European reaction, when the United States absorbed the surplus
proletarian forces of Europe through immigration. Both countries
provided Europe with raw materials and were at the same time markets for
the sale of its industrial products. Bother were, therefore, in one way
of another, pillars of the existing European system.

How very different today. Precisely European immigration fitted North
American for a gigantic agricultural production, whose competition is
shaking the very foundations of European landed property -- large and
small. At the same time, it enabled the United States to exploit its
tremendous industrial resources with an energy and on a scale that must
shortly break the industrial monopoly of Western Europe, and especially
of England, existing up to now. Both circumstances react in a
revolutionary manner upon America itself. Step by step, the small and
middle land ownership of the farmers, the basis of the wh

[Olin Murrell]

of development of the proletariat. The bourgeoisie
finds itself involved in a constant battle. At first with the
aristocracy; later on, with those portions of the bourgeoisie itself,
whose interests have become antagonistic to the progress of industry; at
all time with the bourgeoisie of foreign countries. In all these
battles, it sees itself compelled to appeal to the proletariat, to ask
for help, and thus to drag it into the political arena. The bourgeoisie
itself, therefore, supplies the proletariat with its own elements of
political and general education, in other words, it furnishes the
proletariat with weapons for fighting the bourgeoisie.

Further, as we have already seen, entire sections of the ruling class
are, by the advance of industry, precipitated into the proletariat, or
are at least threatened in their conditions of existence. These also
supply the proletariat with fresh elements of enlightenment and
progress.

Finally, in times when the class struggle nears the decisive hour, the
progress of dissolution going on within the ruling class, in fact within
the whole range of old society, assumes such a violent, glaring
character, that a small section of the ruling class cuts itself adrift,
and joins the revolutionary class, the class that holds the future in
its hands. Just as, therefore, at an earlier period, a section of the
nobility went over to the bourgeoisie, so now a portion of the
bourgeoisie goes over to the proletariat, and in particular, a portion
of the bourgeois ideologists, who have raised themselves to the lev

[Thomas?]

to its non-existence in the hands of those nine-tenths. You reproach us,
therefore, with intending to do away with a form of property, the
necessary condition for whose existence is the non-existence of any
property for the immense majority of society.

In one word, you reproach us with intending to do away with your
property. Precisely so; that is just what we intend.

From the moment when labor can no longer be converted into capital,
money, or rent, into a social power capable of being monopolized, i.e.,
from the moment when individual property can no longer be transformed
into bourgeois property, into capital, from that moment, you say,
individuality vanishes.

You must, therefore, confess that by "individual" you mean no other
person than the bourgeois, than the middle-class owner of property. This
person must, indeed, be swept out of the way, and made impossible.

Communism deprives no man of the power to appropriate the products of
society; all that it does is to deprive him of the power to subjugate
the labor of others by means of such appropriations.

It has been objected that upon the abolition of private property, all
work will cease, and universal laziness will overtake us.

According to this, bourgeois society ought long ago to have gone to the
dogs through sheer idleness; for those who acquire anything, do not
work. The whole of this objection is but another expression of the
tautology: There can no longer be any wage labor when there is no longer
any capital.

All objections urged against the communistic mode of produc

[alohacyberian]

all, in
the individual bourgeois manufacturer himself. The more openly this
despotism proclaims gain to be its end and aim, the more petty, the more
hateful and the more embittering it is.

The less the skill and exertion of strength implied in manual labor, in
other words, the more modern industry becomes developed, the more is the
labor of men superseded by that of women. Differences of age and sex
have no longer any distinctive social validity for the working class.
All are instruments of labor, more or less expensive to use, according
to their age and sex.

No sooner is the exploitation of the laborer by the manufacturer, so far
at an end, that he receives his wages in cash, than he is set upon by
the other portion of the bourgeoisie, the landlord, the shopkeeper, the
pawnbroker, etc.

The lower strata of the middle class -- the small tradespeople,
shopkeepers, and retired tradesmen generally, the handicraftsmen and
peasants -- all these sink gradually into the proletariat, partly
because their diminutive capital does not suffice for the scale on which
Modern Industry is ca

[alohacyberian]

offers to them the
spectacle of a class without any historical initiative or any
independent political movement.

Since the development of class antagonism keeps even pace with the
development of industry, the economic situation, as they find it, does
not as yet offer to them the material conditions for the emancipation of
the proletariat. They therefore search after a new social science, after
new social laws, that are to create these conditions.

Historical action is to yield to their personal inventive action;
historically created conditions of emancipation to fantastic ones; and
the gradual, spontaneous class organization of the proletariat to an
organization of society especially contrived by these inventors. Future
history resolves itself, in their eyes, into the propaganda and the
practical carrying out of their social plans.

In the formation of their plans, they are conscious of caring chiefly
for the interests of the working class, as being the most suffering
class. Only from the point of view of being the most suffering class
does the proletariat exist for them.

The undeveloped state of the class struggle, as well as their own
surroundings, causes Socialists of this kind to consider themselves far
superior to all class antagonisms. They want to improve the condition of
every member of society, even that of the most favored. Hence, they
habitually appeal to society at large, without the distinction of class;
nay, by preference, to the ruling class. For how can people when once
they understand their system, fail to see in it the best possible plan
of the best possible state of society?

Hence, they reject all political, and especially all revolutionary
action; they wish to attain their ends by peaceful means, necessarily
doomed to failure, and by the force of example, to pa

[alohacyberian]

overthrow of the bourgeois supremacy, conquest of political power by the
proletariat.

The theoretical conclusions of the Communists are in no way based on
ideas or principles that have been invented, or discovered, by this or
that would-be universal reformer.

They merely express, in general terms, actual relations springing from
an existing class struggle, from a historical movement going on under
our very eyes. The abolition of existing property relations is not at
all a distinctive feature of communism.

All property relations in the past have continually been subject to
historical change consequent upon the change in historical conditions.

The French Revolution, for example, abolished feudal property in favor
of bourgeois property.

The distinguishing feature of communism is not the abolition of property
generally, but the abolition of bourgeois property. But modern bourgeois
private property is the final and most complete expression of the system
of producing and appropriating products that is based on class
antagonisms, on the exploitation of the many by the few.

In this sense, the theory of the Communists may be summed up in the
single sentence: Abolition of private property.

We Communists have been reproached with the desire of abolishing the
right of personally acquiring property as the fruit of a man's own
labor, which property is alleged to be the groundwork of all personal
freedom, activity and independence.

Hard-won, self-acquired, self-earned property! Do you mean the property
of petty artisan and of the small peasant, a form of property that
preceded the bourgeois form? There is no need to abolish that; the
development of industry has to a great extent already destroyed it, and
is still destroying it daily.

Or do you mean the modern bourgeois private proper

[alohacyberian]

be very
differently worded today. In view of the gigantic strides of Modern
Industry since 1848, and of the accompanying improved and extended
organization of the working class, in view of the practical experience
gained, first in the February Revolution, and then, still more, in the
Paris Commune, where the proletariat for the first time held political
power for two whole months, this programme has in some details been
antiquated. One thing especially was proved by the Commune, viz., that
"the working class cannot simply lay hold of ready-made state machinery,
and wield it for its own purposes." (See The Civil War in France:
Address of the General Council of the International Working Men's
Assocation, 1871, where this point is further developed.) Further, it is
self-evident that the criticism of socialist literature is deficient in
relation to the present time, because it comes down only to 1847; also
that the remarks on the relation of the Communists to the various
opposition parties (Section IV), although, in principle still correct,
yet in practice are antiquated, because the political situation has been
entirely changed, and the progress of history has swept from off the
earth the greater portion of the political parties there enumerated.

But then, the Manifesto has become a historical document which we have
no longer any right to alter. A subsequent edition may perhaps appear
with an introduction bridging the gap from 1847 to the present day; but
this reprint was too unexpected to leave us time for that.

KARL MARX

FREDERICK ENGELS

J

[alohacyberian]

no respect affect the relations between capital and
labor, but, at the best, lessen the cost, and simplify the
administrative work of bourgeois government.

Bourgeois socialism attains adequate expression when, and only when, it
becomes a mere figure of speech.

Free trade: for the benefit of the working class. Protective duties: for
the benefit of the working class. Prison reform: for the benefit of the
working class. This is the last word and the only seriously meant word
of bourgeois socialism.

It is summed up in the phrase: the bourgeois is a bourgeois -- for the
benefit of the working class.

3. CRITICAL-UTOPIAN SOCIALISM AND COMMUNISM

We do not here refer to that literature which, in every great modern
revolution, has always given voice to the demands of the proletariat,
such as the writings of Babeuf [4] and others.

The first direct attempts of the proletariat to attain its own ends,
made in times of universal excitement, when feudal society was being
overthrown, necessarily failed, owing to the then undeveloped state of
the proletariat, a

[alohacyberian]

you Communists would introduce community of women, screams the
bourgeoisie in chorus.

The bourgeois sees his wife a mere instrument of production. He hears
that the instruments of production are to be exploited in common, and,
naturally, can come to no other conclusion that the lot of being common
to all will likewise fall to the women.

He has not even a suspicion that the real point aimed at is to do away
with the status of women as mere instruments of production.

For the rest, nothing is more ridiculous than the virtuous indignation
of our bourgeois at the community of women which, they pretend, is to be
openly and officially established by the Communists. The Communists have
no need to introduce free love; it has existed almost from time
immemorial.

Our bourgeois, not content with having wives and daughters of their
proletarians at their disposal, not to speak of common prostitutes, take
the greatest pleasure in seducing each other's wives. (Ah, those were
the days!)

Bourgeois marriage is, in reality, a system of wives in common and thus,
at the most, what the Communists might possibly be reproached with is
that they desire to introduce, in substitution for a hypocritically
concealed, an openly legalized system of free love. For the rest, it is
self-evident that the abolition of the present system of production must
bring with it the abolition of free love springing from that system,
i.e., of prostitution both public and private.

The Communists are further reproached with desiring to abolish countr

[alohacyberian]

a few hands. The necessary consequence of this
was political centralization. Independent, or but loosely connected
provinces, with separate interests, laws, governments, and systems of
taxation, became lumped together into one nation, with one government,
one code of laws, one national class interest, one frontier, and one
customs tariff.

The bourgeoisie, during its rule of scarce one hundred years, has
created more massive and more colossal productive forces than have all
preceding generations together. Subjection of nature's forces to man,
machinery, application of chemistry to industry and agriculture, steam
navigation, railways, electric telegraphs, clearing of whole continents
for cultivation, canalization or rivers, whole populations conjured out
of the ground -- what earlier century had even a presentiment that such
productive forces slumbered in the lap of social labor?

We see then: the means of production and of exchange, on whose
foundation the bourgeoisie built itself up, were generated in feudal
society. At a certain stage in the development of these means of
production and of exchange, the conditions under which feudal society
produced and exchanged, the feudal organization of agriculture and
manufacturing industry, in one word, the feudal relations of property
became no longer compatible with the already developed productive
forces; they became so many fetters. They had to be burst asunder; the

[alohacyberian]

(1818-1861) crowning discovery of
the true nature of the gens and its relation to the tribe. With the
dissolution of the primeaval communities, society begins to be
differentiated into separate and finally antagonistic classes. I have
attempted to retrace this dissolution in _Der Ursprung der

Familie, des Privateigenthumus und des Staats_, second edition,
Stuttgart, 1886. [Engels, 1888 English edition]

[3] Guild-master, that is, a full member of a guild, a master within,
not a head of a guild. [Engels: 1888 English edition]

[4] This was the name given their urban communities by the townsmen of
Italy and France, after they had purchased or conquered their initial
rights of self-government from their feudal lords. [Engels: 1890 German
edition]

"Commune" was the name taken in France by the nascent towns even before
they had conquered from their feudal lords and masters local
self-government and political rights as the "Third Estate". Generally
speaking, for the economical development of the bourgeoisie, England is
here taken as the typical country, for its political development,
France. [Engels: 1888 English edition]



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

II -- PROLETARIANS AND COMMUNISTS

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In what relation do the Communists stand to the proletarians as a whole?
The Communists do not form a separate party opposed to the other
working-class parties.

They have no interests separate and apart from those of the proletariat
as a whole.

They do not set up any sectarian principles of their own, by which to
shape and mold the proletarian movement.

The Communists are dist

[Idie]

Unfortunately, the original German manuscript has gone astray; I must
therefore retranslate from the Russian which will in no way improve the
text. It reads:

"The first Russian edition of the Manifesto of the Communist Party,
translated by Bakunin, was published early in the 'sixties by the
printing office of the Kolokol. Then the West could see in it (the
Russian edition of the Manifesto) only a literary curiosity. Such a view
would be impossible today.

"What a limited field the proletarian movement occupied at that time
(December 1847) is most clearly shown by the last section: the position
of the Communists in relation to the various opposition parties in
various countries. Precisely Russia and the United States are missing
here. It was the time when Russia constituted the last great reserve of
all European reaction, when the United States absorbed the surplus
proletarian forces of Europe through immigration. Both countries
provided Europe with raw materials and were at the same time markets for
the sale of its industrial products. Both were, therefore, in one way of
another, pillars of the existing European system.

"How very different today. Precisely European immigration fitted North
American for a gigantic agricultural production, whose competition is
shaking the very foundations of European landed property -- large and
small. At the same time, it enabled the United States to exploit its
tremendous industrial resources with an energy and on a scale that must
shortly break the industrial monopoly of Western Europe, and especially
of England, existing up to now. Both circumstances react in a
revolutionary manner upon America itself. Step by step, the small and
middle land ownership of the farmers, the basis of the whole political
constitution, is succumbing to the competition of giant farms; at the
same time, a mass industrial proletariat and a fabulous conc

[Olin Murrell]

by means of schools, etc.? The Communists have not
intended the intervention of society in education; they do but seek to
alter the character of that intervention, and to rescue education from
the influence of the ruling class.

The bourgeois claptrap about the family and education, about the
hallowed correlation of parents and child, becomes all the more
disgusting, the more, by the action of Modern Industry, all the family
ties among the proletarians are torn asunder, and their children
transformed into simple articles of commerce and instruments of labor.

But you Communists would introduce community of women, screams the
bourgeoisie in chorus.

The bourgeois sees his wife a mere instrument of production. He hears
that the instruments of production are to be exploited in common, and,
naturally, can come to no other conclusion that the lot of being common
to all will likewise fall to the women.

He has not even a suspicion that the real point aimed at is to do away
with the status of women as mere instruments of production.

For the rest, nothing is more ridiculous than the virtuous indignation
of our bourgeois at the community of women which, they pretend, is to be
openly and officially established by the Communists. The Communists have
no need to introduce free love; it has existed almost from time
immemorial.

Our bourgeois, not content with having wives and daughters of their
proletarians at their disposal, not to speak of common prostitutes, take
the greatest pleasure in seducing each other's wives. (Ah, those were
the days!)

Bourgeois marriage is, in reality, a system of wives in common and thus,
at the most, what

[Idie]

English trade unions, though
most of them had long since severed their connection with the
International, were gradually advancing towards that point at which,
last year at Swansea, their president could say in their name:
"Continental socialism has lost its terror for us." In fact, the
principles of the Manifesto had made considerable headway among the
working men of all countries.

The Manifesto itself came thus to the front again. Since 1850, the
German text had been reprinted several times in Switzerland, England,
and America. In 1872, it was translated into English in New York, where
the translation was published in _Woorhull and Claflin's Weekly_. From
this English version, a French one was made in _Le Socialiste_ of New
York. Since then, at least two more English translations, moer or less
mutilated, have been brought out in America, and one of them has been
reprinted in England. The first Russian translation, made by Bakunin,
was published at Herzen's Kolokol office in Geneva, about 1863; a second
one, by the heroic Vera Zasulich, also in Geneva, in 1882. A new Danish
edition is to be found in _Socialdemokratisk Bibliothek_, Copenhagen,
1885; a fresh French translation in _Le Socialiste_, Paris, 1886. From
this latter, a Spanish version was prepared

[Olin Murrell]

credit.]

Marx, who drew up this programme to the satisfaction of all parties,
entirely trusted to the intellectual development of the working class,
which was sure to result from combined action and mutual discussion. The
very events and vicissitudes in the struggle against capital, the
defeats even more than the victories, could not help bringing home to
men's minds the insufficiency of their various favorite nostrums, and
preparing the way for a more complete insight into the true conditions
for working-class emancipation. And Marx was right. The International,
on its breaking in 1874, left the workers quite different men from what
it found them in 1864. Proudhonism in France, Lassalleanism in Germany,
were dying out, and even the conservative English trade unions, though
most of them had long since severed their connection with the
International, were gradually advancing towards that point at which,
last year at Swansea, their president could say in their name:
"Continental socialism has lost its terror for us." In fact, the
principles of the Manifesto had made considerable headway among the
working men of all countries.

The Manifesto itself came thus to the front again. Since 1850, the
German text had been reprinted several times in Switzerland, England,
and America. In 1872, it was translated into English in New York, where
the translation was published in _Woorhull and Claflin's Weekly_. From
this English version, a French one was made in _Le Socialiste_ of New
York. Since then, at least two more English translations, moer or less
mutilated, have been brought out in America, and one of them has been
reprinted in England. The first Russian translation, made by Bakunin,
was published at Herzen's Kolokol office in Geneva, about 1863; a second
one, by the heroic Vera Zasulich, also in Geneva, in 1882. A new Danish
edition is to be found in _Socialdemokratisk Bibliothek_, Copenhagen,
1885; a fresh French translation in _Le Socialiste_, Paris, 1886. From
this la

[Olin Murrell]

pointing out that their mode of exploitation was different to that of
the bourgeoisie, the feudalists forget that they exploited under
circumstances and conditions that were quite different and that are now
antiquated. In showing that, under their rule, the modern proletariat
never existed, they forget that the modern bourgeoisie is the necessary
offspring of their own form of society.

For the rest, so little do they conceal the reactionary character of
their criticism that their chief accusation against the bourgeois
amounts to this: that under the bourgeois regime a class is being
developed which is destined to cut up, root and branch, the old order of
society.

What they upbraid the bourgeoisie with is not so much that it creates a
proletariat as that it creates a _revolutionary_ proletariat.

In political practice, therefore, they join in all corrective measures
against the working class; and in ordinary life, despite their high
falutin' phrases, they stoop to pick up the golden apples dropped from
the tree of industry, and to barter truth, love, and honor, for traffic
in wool, beetroot-sugar, and potato spirits. [2]

As the parson has ever gone hand in hand with the landlord, so has
clerical socialism with feudal socialism.

Nothing is easier than to give Christian asceticism a socialist tin

[Olin Murrell]

West could see in it (the
Russian edition of the Manifesto) only a literary curiosity. Such a view
would be impossible today.

What a limited field the proletarian movement occupied at that time
(December 1847) is most clearly shown by the last section: the position
of the Communists in relation to the various opposition parties in
various countries. Precisely Russia and the United States are missing
here. It was the time when Russia constituted the last great reserve of
all European reaction, when the United States absorbed the surplus
proletarian forces of Europe through immigration. Both countries
provided Europe with raw materials and were at the same time markets for
the sale of its industrial products. Bother were, therefore, in one way
of another, pillars of the existing European system.

How very different today. Precisely European immigration fitted North
American for a gigantic agricultural production, whose competition is
shaking the very foundations of European landed property -- large and
small. At the same time, it enabled the United States to exploit its
tremendous industrial resources with an energy and on a scale that must
shortly break the industrial monopoly of Western Europe, and especially
of England, existing up to now. Both circumstances react in a
revolutionary manner upon America itself. Step by step, the small and
middle land ownership of the far

[Olin Murrell]

and practical party programme. Drawn up in German,
in January 1848, the manuscript was sent to the printer in London a few
weeks before the French Revolution of February 24. A French translation
was brought out in Paris shortly before the insurrection of June 1848.
The first English translation, by Miss Helen Macfarlane, appeared in
George Julian Harney's _Red Republican_, London, 1850. A Danish and a
Polish edition had also been published.

The defeat of the Parisian insurrection of June 1848 -- the first great
battle between proletariat and bourgeoisie -- drove again into the
background, for a time, the social and political aspirations of the
European working class. Thenceforth, the struggle for supremacy was,
again, as it had been before the Revolution of February, solely between
different sections of the propertied class; the working class was
reduced to a fight for political elbow-room, and to the position of
extreme wing of the middle-class Radicals. Wherever independent
proletarian movements continued to show signs of life, they were
ruthlessly hunted down. Thus the Prussian police hunted out the Central
Board of the Communist League, then located in Cologne. The members were
arrested and, after eighteen months' imprisonment, they were tried in
October 1852. This selebrated "Cologne Communist Trial" lasted from
October 4 till November 12; seven of the p

[Olin Murrell]

into
two great classes directly facing each other -- bourgeoisie and
proletariat.

From the serfs of the Middle Ages sprang the chartered burghers of the
earliest towns. From these burgesses the first elements of the
bourgeoisie were developed.

The discovery of America, the rounding of the Cape, opened up fresh
ground for the rising bourgeoisie. The East-Indian and Chinese markets,
the colonisation of America, trade with the colonies, the increase in
the means of exchange and in commodities generally, gave to commerce, to
navigation, to industry, an impulse never before known, and thereby, to
the revolutionary element in the tottering feudal society, a rapid
development.

The feudal system of industry, in which industrial production was
monopolized by closed guilds, now no longer suffices for the growing
wants of the new markets. The manufacturing system took its place. The
guild-masters were pushed aside by the manufacturing middle class;
division of labor between the different corporate guilds vanished in the
face of division of labor in each single workshop.

Meantime, the markets kept ever growing, the demand ever rising. Even
manufacturers no longer sufficed. Thereupon, steam and machinery
revolutionized industrial production. The place of manufacture was taken
by the giant, MODERN INDUSTRY; the place of the industrial middle class
by industrial millionaires, the leaders of the whole industrial armies,
the modern bourgeois.

Modern industry has established the world market, for which the
discovery of America paved the way. This market has given an immense
development to commerce, to navigation, to communication by land. This
development has, in turn, reacted on the extension of industry; and in
proportion as industry, commerce, navigation, railways extended, in the
same proportion the bourgeoisie developed, increa

[Olin Murrell]

is to raise the proletariat to the position of ruling class to win
the battle of democracy.

The proletariat will use its political supremacy to wrest, by degree,
all capital from the bourgeoisie, to centralize all instruments of
production in the hands of the state, i.e., of the proletariat organized
as the ruling class; and to increase the total productive forces as
rapidly as possible.

Of course, in the beginning, this cannot be effected except by means of
despotic inroads on the rights of property, and on the conditions of
bourgeois production; by means of measures, therefore, which appear
economically insufficient and untenable, but which, in the course of the
movement, outstrip themselves, necessitate further inroads upon the old
social order, and are unavoidable as a means of entirely revolutionizing
the mode of production.

These measures will, of course, be different in different countries.

Nevertheless, in most advanced countries, the following will be pretty
generally applicable.

1. Abolition of property in land and app

[Thomas?]

heralded in the Manifesto. Thus, to a certain
extent, the history of the Manifesto reflects the history of the modern
working-class movement since 1848. At present, it is doubtless the most
widely circulated, the most international product of all socialist
literature, the common programme of many millions of workers of all
countries from Siberia to California.

Nevertheless, when it appeared, we could not have called it a
_socialist_ manifesto. In 1847, two kinds of people were considered
socialists. On the one hand were the adherents of the various utopian
systems, notably the Owenites in England and the Fourierists in France,
both of whom, at that date, had already dwindled to mere sects gradually
dying out. On the other, the manifold types of social quacks who wanted
to eliminate social abuses through their various universal panaceas and
all kinds of patch-work, without hurting capital and profit in the
least. In both cases, people who stood outside the labor movement and
who looked for support rather to the "educated" classes. The section of
the working

[Thomas?]

dominating classes at
various stages of social evolution; that this struggle, however, has now
reached a stage where the exploited and oppressed class (the
proletariat) can no longer emancipate itself from the class which
exploits and oppresses it (the bourgeoisie), without at the same time
forever freeing the whole of society from exploitation, oppression,
class struggles -- this basic thought belongs soley and exclusively to
Marx.

[ENGELS FOOTNOTE TO PARAGRAPH: "This proposition", I wrote in the
preface to the English translation, "which, in my opinion, is destined
to do for history what Darwin's theory has done for biology, we both of
us, had been gradually approaching for some years before 1845. How far I
had independently progressed towards it is best shown by my _Conditions
of the Working Class in England_. But when I again met Marx at Brussels,
in spring 1845, he had it already worked out and put it before me in
terms almost as clear as those in which I have stated it here."]

I have already stated this many times; but precisely now is it necessary
that it also stand in front of the Manifesto itself.

FREDERICK ENGELS

June 28, 1883
London



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

PREFACE TO 1888 ENGLISH EDITION

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Manifesto was published as the platform of the Communist League, a
working men's association, first exclusively German, later on
international, and under the political conditions of the Continent
before 1848, unavoidably a secret society. At a Congress of the League,
held in November 1847, Marx and

[dgs]

of the world market, conquered for itself, in the
modern representative state, exclusive political sway. The executive of
the modern state is but a committee for managing the common affairs of
the whole bourgeoisie.

The bourgeoisie, historically, has played a most revolutionary part.

The bourgeoisie, wherever it has got the upper hand, has put an end to
all feudal, patriarchal, idyllic relations. It has pitilessly torn
asunder the motley feudal ties that bound man to his "natural
superiors", and has left no other nexus between people than naked
self-interest, than callous "cash payment". It has drowned out the most
heavenly ecstacies of religious fervor, of chivalrous enthusiasm, of
philistine sentimentalism, in the icy water of egotistical calculation.
It has resolved personal worth into exchange value, and in place of the
numberless indefeasible chartered freedoms, has set up that single,
unconscionable freedom -- Free Trade. In one word, for exploitation,
veiled by religious and political illusions, it has substituted naked,
shameless, direct, brutal exploitation.

The bourgeoisie has stripped of its halo every occupation hitherto
honored and looked up to with reverent awe. It has converted the
physician, the lawyer, the priest, the poet, the man of science, into
its paid wage laborers.

The bourgeoisie has torn away from the family its sentimental veil, and
has reduced the family relation into a mere money relation.

The bourgeoisie has disclosed how it came to pass that the brutal
display of vigor in the Middle Ages, which reactionaries so much admire,
found its fitting complement in the most slothful indo

[Chad Gore]

since the establishment of
Modern Industry and of the world market, conquered for itself, in the
modern representative state, exclusive political sway. The executive of
the modern state is but a committee for managing the common affairs of
the whole bourgeoisie.

The bourgeoisie, historically, has played a most revolutionary part.

The bourgeoisie, wherever it has got the upper hand, has put an end to
all feudal, patriarchal, idyllic relations. It has pitilessly torn
asunder the motley feudal ties that bound man to his "natural
superiors", and has left no other nexus between people than naked
self-interest, than callous "cash payment". It has drowned out the most
heavenly ecstacies of religious fervor, of chivalrous enthusiasm, of
philistine sentimentalism, in the icy water of egotistical calculation.
It has resolved personal worth into exchange value, and in place of the
numberless indefeasible chartered freedoms, has set up that single,
unconscionable freedom -- Free Trade. In one word, for exploitation,
veiled by religious and political illusions, it has substituted naked,
shameless, direct, brutal exploitation.

The bourgeoisie has stripped of its halo every occupation hitherto
honored and looked up to with reverent awe. It has converted the
physician, the lawyer, the priest, the poet, the man of science, into
its paid wage laborers.

The bourgeoisie has torn away from the family its sentimental veil, and
has reduced the family relation into a mere money relation.

The bourgeoisie has disclosed how it came to pass that the brutal
display of vigor in the Middle Ages, which reactionaries so much admire,
found its fitting complement in the most slothful indolence. It has been
the first to show what man's activi

[Chad Gore]

There can no longer be any wage labor when there is no longer
any capital.

All objections urged against the communistic mode of producing and
appropriating material products, have, in the same way, been urged
against the communistic mode of producing and appropriating intellectual
products. Just as to the bourgeois, the disappearance of class property
is the disappearance of production itself, so the disappearance of class
culture is to him identical with the disappearance of all culture.

That culture, the loss of which he laments, is, for the enormous
majority, a mere training to act as a machine.

But don't wrangle with us so long as you apply, to our intended
abolition of bourgeois property, the standard of your bourgeois notions
of freedom, culture, law, etc. Your very ideas are but the outgrowth of
the conditions of your bourgeois production and bourgeois property, just
as your jurisprudence is but the will of your class made into a law for
all, a will whose essential character and direction are determined by
the economical conditions of existence of your class.

The selfish misconception that induces you to transform into eternal
laws of nature and of reason the social forms stringing from your
present mode of production and form of property -- historical relations
tha

[alohacyberian]

and take care of the future
of that movement. In France, the Communists ally with the Social
Democrats* against the conservative and radical bourgeoisie, reserving,
however, the right to take up a critical position in regard to phases
and illusions traditionally handed down from the Great Revolution.

In Switzerland, they support the Radicals, without losing sight of the
fact that this party consists of antagonistic elements, partly of
Democratic Socialists, in the French sense, partly of radical bourgeois.

In Poland, they support the party that insists on an agrarian revolution
as the prime condition for national emancipation, that party which
fomented the insurrection of Krakow in 1846.

In Germany, they fight with the bourgeoisie whenever it acts in a
revolutionary way, against the absolute monarchy, the feudal
squirearchy, and the petty-bourgeoisie.

But they never cease, for a single instant, to instill into the working
class the clearest possible recognition of the hostile antagonism
between bourgeoisie and proletariat, in order that the German workers
may straightway use, as so many weapons against the bourgeoisie, the
social and political conditions that the bourgeoisie must necessarily
introduce along with its supremacy, and in order that, after the fall of
the reactionary classes in Germany, the fight against the bourgeoisie
itself may immediately begin.

The Communists turn their attention chiefly to Germany, because that
country is on the eve of a bourgeois revolution that is bound to be
carried out under more advanced conditions of European civilization and
with a much more developed proletariat than that of England was in the
seventeenth, and France in the eighteenth century, and because the
bourgeois revolution in Germany will be but the prelude to an
immediately following prole

[alohacyberian]

same character, into one national struggle
between classes. But every class struggle is a political struggle. And
that union, to attain which the burghers of the Middle Ages, with their
miserable highways, required centuries, the modern proletarian, thanks
to railways, achieve in a few years.

This organization of the proletarians into a class, and, consequently,
into a political party, is continually being upset again by the
competition between the workers themselves. But it ever rises up again,
stronger, firmer, mightier. It compels legislative recognition of
particular interests of the workers, by taking advantage of the
divisions among the bourgeoisie itself. Thus, the Ten-Hours Bill in
England was carried.

Altogether, collisions between the classes of the old society further in
many ways the course of development of the proletariat. The bourgeoisie
finds itself involved in a constant battle. At first with the
aristocracy; later on, with those portions of the bourgeoisie itself,
whose interests have become antagonistic to the progre

[alohacyberian]

unconscionable freedom -- Free Trade. In one word, for exploitation,
veiled by religious and political illusions, it has substituted naked,
shameless, direct, brutal exploitation.

The bourgeoisie has stripped of its halo every occupation hitherto
honored and looked up to with reverent awe. It has converted the
physician, the lawyer, the priest, the poet, the man of science, into
its paid wage laborers.

The bourgeoisie has torn away from the family its sentimental veil, and
has reduced the family relation into a mere money relation.

The bourgeoisie has disclosed how it came to pass that the brutal
display of vigor in the Middle Ages, which reactionaries so much admire,
found its fitting complement in the most slothful indolence. It has been
the first to show what man's activity can bring about. It has
accomplished wonders far surpassing Egyptian pyramids, Roman aqueducts,
and Gothic cathedrals; it has conducted expeditions that put in the
shade all former exoduses of nations and crusades.

The bourgeoisie cannot exist without constantly revolutionizing the
instruments of production, and thereby the relations of production, and
with them the whole relations of society. Conservation of the old modes
of production in unaltered form, was, on the contrary, the first
condition of e

[alohacyberian]

with their train of ancient and venerable prejudices and opinions, are
swept away, all new-formed ones become antiquated before they can
ossify. All that is solid melts into air, all that is holy is profaned,
and man is at last compelled to face with sober senses his real
condition of life and his relations with his kind.

The need of a constantly expanding market for its products chases the
bourgeoisie over the entire surface of the globe. It must nestle
everywhere, settle everywhere, establish connections everywhere.

The bourgeoisie has, through its exploitation of the world market, given
a cosmopolitan character to production and consumption in every country.
To the great chagrin of reactionaries, it has drawn from under the feet
of industry the national ground on which it stood. All old-established
national industries have been destroyed or are daily being destroyed.
They are dislodged by new industries, whose introduction becomes a life
and death question for all civilized nations, by industries that no
longer work up indigenous raw material, but raw material drawn from the
remotest zones; industries whose products are consumed, not only at
home, but in every quarter of the globe. In place of the old wants,
satisfied by the production of the country, we find new wants, requiring
for their satisfaction the products of distant lands and climes. In
place of the old local and national seclusion and self-sufficiency, we
have intercourse in every direction, universal inter-dependence of
nations. And as in material, so also in intellectual production. The
intellectual creations of individual nations become common pr

[alohacyberian]

wages in cash, than he is set upon by
the other portion of the bourgeoisie, the landlord, the shopkeeper, the
pawnbroker, etc.

The lower strata of the middle class -- the small tradespeople,
shopkeepers, and retired tradesmen generally, the handicraftsmen and
peasants -- all these sink gradually into the proletariat, partly
because their diminutive capital does not suffice for the scale on which
Modern Industry is carried on, and is swamped in the competition with
the large capitalists, partly because their specialized skill is
rendered worthless by new methods of production. Thus, the proletariat
is recruited from all classes of the population.

The proletariat goes through various stages of development. With its
birth begins its struggle with the bourgeoisie. At first, the contest is
carried on by individual laborers, then by the work of people of a
factory, then by the operative of one trade, in one locality, against
the individual bourgeois who directly exploits them. They direct their
attacks not against the bourgeois condition of production, but against
the instruments of production themselves; they destroy imported wares
that compete with their labor, they smash to pieces machinery, they set
factories ablaze, they seek to restore by force the vanished status of
the workman of the Middle Ages.

At this stage, the laborers still form an incoherent mass scattered over
the whole country, and broken up by their mutual competition. If
anywhere they unite to form more compact bodies, this is not yet the
consequence of their own active union, but of the union of the
bourgeoisie, which class, in order to attain its own political ends, is
compelled to set the whole proletari

[alohacyberian]

January 21, 1882
London



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

PREFACE TO 1883 GERMAN EDITION

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The preface to the present edition I must, alas, sign alone. Marx, the
man to whom the whole working class class of Europe and America owes
more than to any one else -- rests at Highgate Cemetary and over his
grave the first first grass is already growing. Since his death [March
13, 1883], there can be even less thought of revising or supplementing
the Manifesto. But I consider it all the more necessary again to state
the following expressly:

The basic thought running through the Manifesto -- that economic
production, and the structure of society of every historical epoch
necessarily arising therefrom, constitute the foundation for the
political and intellectual history of that epoch; that consequently
(ever since the dissolution of the primaeval communal ownership

[alohacyberian]

they
were burst asunder.

Into their place stepped free competition, accompanied by a social and
political constitution adapted in it, and the economic and political
sway of the bourgeois class.

A similar movement is going on before our own eyes. Modern bourgeois
society, with its relations of production, of exchange and of property,
a society that has conjured up such gigantic means of production and of
exchange, is like the sorcerer who is no longer able to control the
powers of the nether world whom he has called up by his spells. For many
a decade past, the history of industry and commerce is but the history
of the revolt of modern productive forces against modern conditions of
production, against the property relations that are the conditions for
the existence of the bourgeois and of its rule. It is enough to mention
the commercial crises that, by their periodical return, put the
existence of the entire bourgeois society on its trial, each time more
threateningly. In these crises, a great part not only of the existing
products, but also of the previously created productive forces, are
periodically destroyed. In these crises, there breaks out an epidemic
that

[alohacyberian]

_ were socialist
colonies on the plan of Charles Fourier; Icaria was the name given by
Caber to his utopia and, later on, to his American communist colony.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV -- POSITION OF THE COMMUNISTS IN RELATION TO
THE VARIOUS EXISTING OPPOSITION PARTIES

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Section II has made clear the relations of the Communists to the
existing working-class parties, such as the Chartists in England and the
Agrarian Reformers in America.

The Communists fight for the attainment of the immediate aims, for the
enforcement of the momentary interests of the working class; but in the
movement of the present, they also represent and take care of the future
of that movement. In France, the Communists ally with the Social
Democrats* against the conservative and radical bourgeoisie, reserving,
however, the right to take up a critical position in regard to phases
and illusions traditionally handed down from the Great Revolution.

In Switzerland, they support the Radicals, without losing sight of the
fact that this party consists of antagonistic elements, partly of
Democratic Socialists, in the French sense, partly of radical bourgeois.

In Poland, they support the party that insists on an agrarian revolution
as the prime condition for nati

[alohacyberian]

system, fail to see in it the best possible plan
of the best possible state of society?

Hence, they reject all political, and especially all revolutionary
action; they wish to attain their ends by peaceful means, necessarily
doomed to failure, and by the force of example, to pave the way for the
new social gospel.

Such fantastic pictures of future society, painted at a time when the
proletariat is still in a very undeveloped state and has but a fantastic
conception of its own position, correspond with the first instinctive
yearnings of that class for a general reconstruction of society.

But these socialist and communist publications contain also a critical
element. They attack every principle of existing society. Hence, they
are full of the most valuable materials for the enlightenment of the
working class. The practical measures proposed in them -- such as the
abolition of the distinction between town and country, of the family, of
the carrying on of industries for the account of private individuals,
and of the wage system, the proclamation of social harmony, the
conversion of the function of the state into a more superintendence of
production -- all these proposals point solely to the disappearance of
class antagonisms which

[alohacyberian]

alone. Thus, the aristocracy took their revenge by singing lampoons on
their new masters and whispering in his ears sinister prophesies of
coming catastrophe.

In this way arose feudal socialism: half lamentation, half lampoon; half
an echo of the past, half menace of the future; at times, by its bitter,
witty and incisive criticism, striking the bourgeoisie to the very
heart's core, but always ludicrous in its effect, through total
incapacity to comprehend the march of modern history.

The aristocracy, in order to rally the people to them, waved the
proletarian alms-bag in front for a banner. But the people, so often as
it joined them, saw on their hindquarters the old feudal coats of arms,
and deserted with loud and irreverent laughter.

One section of the French Legitimists and "Young England" exhibited this
spectacle:

In pointing out that their mode of exploitation was different to that of
the bourgeoisie, the feudalists forget that they exploited under
circumstances and conditions that were quite different and that are now
antiquated. In showing that, under their rule, the modern proletariat
never existed, they forget that the modern

[Kelli Halliburton]

Communist Party 1848

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


A spectre is haunting Europe -- the spectre of communism. All the powers
of old Europe have entered into a holy alliance to exorcise this
spectre: Pope and Tsar, Metternich and Guizot, French Radicals and
German police-spies.

Where is the party in opposition that has not been decried as
communistic by its opponents in power? Where is the opposition that has
not hurled back the branding reproach of communism, against the more
advanced opposition parties, as well as against its reactionary
adversaries?

Two things result from this fact:

I. Communism is already acknowledged by all European powers to be itself
a power.

II. It is high time that Communists should openly, in the face of the
whole world, publish their views, their aims, their tendencies, and meet
this nursery tale of the spectre of communism with a manifesto of the
party itself.

To this end, Communists of various nationalities have assembled in
London and sketched the following manifesto, to be published in the
English, French, German, Italian, Flemish and Danish languages.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I -- BOURGEOIS AND PROLETARIANS [1]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The history of all hitherto existing society [2] is the history of class
struggles.

Freem

[alohacyberian]

philosophy, political science, and
law, constantly survived this change."

"There are, besides, eternal truths, such as Freedom, Justice, etc.,
that are common to all states of society. But communism abolishes
eternal truths, it abolishes all religion, and all morality, instead of
constituting them on a new basis; it therefore acts in contradiction to
all past historical experience."

What does this accusation reduce itself to? The history of all past
society has consisted in the development of class antagonisms,
antagonisms that assumed different forms at different epochs.

But whatever form they may have taken, one fact is common to all past
ages, viz., the exploitation of one part of society by the other. No
wonder, then, that the social consciousness of past ages, despite all
the multiplicity and variety it displays, moves within certain common
forms, or general ideas, which cannot completely vanish except with the
total disappearance of class antagonisms.

The communist revolution is the most radical rupture with traditional
relations; no wonder that its development involved the most radical
rupture with traditional ideas.

But let us have done with the bourgeois objections to communism.

We have seen above that the first step in the revolution by the working
class is to raise the proletariat to the position of ruling class to win
the battle of democracy.

The proletariat will use its political supremacy to wrest, by degree,
all capital from the bourgeoisie, to centralize all instruments of
production in the hands of the state, i.e., of the proletariat organized
as the ruling class; and to increase the total productive forces as
rapi

[alohacyberian]

A new translation is in the course of
preparation. A Polish version appeared in London shortly after it was
first published in Germany. A Russian translation was published in
Geneva in the 'sixties. Into Danish, too, it was translated shortly
after its appearance.

However much that state of things may have altered during the last
twenty-five years, the general principles laid down in the Manifesto
are, on the whole, as correct today as ever. Here and there, some detail
might be improved. The practical application of the principles will
depend, as the Manifesto itself states, everywhere and at all times, on
the historical conditions for the time being existing, and, for that
reason, no special stress is laid on the revolutionary measures proposed
at the end of Section II. That passage would, in many respects, be very
differently worded today. In view of the gigantic strides of Modern
Industry since 1848, and of the accompanying improved and extended
organization of the working class, in view of the practical experience
gained, first in the February Revolution, and then, still more, in the
Paris Commune, where the proletariat for the first time held political
power for two whole months, this programme has in some details been
antiquated. One thing especially was proved by the Commune, viz., that
"the working class cannot simply lay hold of ready-made state machinery,
and wield it for its own purposes." (See The Civil War in France:
Address of the General Council of the International Working Men's
Assocation, 1871, where this point is further developed.) Further, it is
self-evident that the criticism of socialist literature is deficient in
relation to the present time, because it comes down only to 1847; also
that the remarks on the relation of the Communists to the various
opposition parti

[rob]

did it for the
Mob, and an all out trashing of the Kennedys.

The standard defense by these purveyors is that they go on the
offense. Anyone who objects to their peculiar blend of
misinformation, or questions their sources or intent is labeled
as "protecting the Kennedys," or a "disappointed Kennedy fan," or
a "hagiographer." Tactically, this is a great cover to avoid the
questionable credibility of people like the Alsops, Priscilla
Johnson McMillan, or a flimflam man like Slatzer. It also avoids
acknowledging their descent into the ranks of Hoover and
Angleton. When Summers' book on Hoover came out, which followed
much the same line on the Kennedys as Goddess, he got a guest
spot on The Larry King Show. There, Hoover aide Cartha De Loach
called his book a collection of "sleaze." Summers fought back by
saying that Hoover and De Loach were peddling "sex tapes" about
Martin Luther King to the press. At that point, if Larry King
weren't such a stiff, he would have stepped in and noted, "But
Tony, we expect that kind of thing from a guy like Hoover. What's
your excuse?"

So Where are the Kennedys?

In a deeper sens

[alohacyberian]

-Puritan and then added:
The stories about Bobby Kennedy and Marilyn Monroe were just
stories. The original story was invented by a so-called
journalist, a right-wing zealot who had a history of
spinning wild yarns. It spread like wildfire, of course, and
J. Edgar Hoover was right there, gleefully fanning the
flames. (The Bureau p. 56)

The Capell/Winchell/Hoover triangle sowed the seeds of this
slander. But the exposure of this triangle does more. In the
Vanity Fair article in which Judith Exner dumped out the latest
installment of her continuing saga, Liz Smith revealed that she
apprenticed at the feet of Walter Winchell in New York (January
1997 p. 32). This may explain why she took up her mentor's
cudgel.

Capell's work is, as Spoto notes in his Afterword, a frightful
piece of reactionary paranoia. But there are two details in his
pat anti-Kennedy tract that merit mention. First, Capell is
probably the first to propagate the idea that RFK was indirectly
responsible for his brother's murder. He does this by saying (p.
52), that commie sympathizer Bobby called off the investigation
of the shooting of General Edwin Walker in April of 1963, thus
allowing that crazed Communist Oswald to escape and later kill
JFK. This piece of rant has been modified later to fit into the
stilted mosaics of people like Davis and Waldron. What makes it
so fascinating is that, through the FBI's own files, we now have
evidence that Capell was de

[alohacyberian]

before these former
soldiers who had actually gone to war, Cheney had ducked out of the
Vietnam War. The same was true for Wolfowitz and the rest of the Bush
Jr. administration's Straussian Neo-Con cabal. They were too busy
studying Machiavelli and Nietzsche with Strauss, Bloom, and their
acolytes from the University of Chicago. Chickenhawks to a man. Bush Jr.
too. The American Power Elite are more than happy to send the children
of poor Blacks, Latinos and Whites off to kill and be killed in
Afghanistan, Iraq, and elsewhere. Just like their elitist predecessors
did a generation ago in Vietnam, Cambodia, and Laos. Class warfare
indeed. Finally, in September 2002 the Bush Jr. administration adopted
and officially approved "the National Security Strategy of the United
States," that was transmitted to the U.S. Congress as a declaration of
official policy by the United States of America, fully embracing this
reprehensible, criminal, and Nazi doctrine of preventive warfare.38 I
will not waste the reader's precious time here analyzing this criminal
document in extenso. But it reads like a Nazi war planning document that
could have been introduced into evidence before the Nuremberg Tribunal.

Certainly its most odious language is: ". . . we recognize that our best
defense is a good offense. . ." In other words, the United States
government has publicly admitted in an official government document

[Clave]

before his wedding to Jackie, and that this fact had been
covered up. Both Bradlee and Truitt pursued the story. But before
they printed it they asked Kennedy about it. He referred them to
Pierre Salinger, his press secretary. Salinger had already heard
the charge from rightwing commentator Fulton Lewis. He had all
his points lined up and proved the story false. Bradlee's account
in Conversations With Kennedy (pp. 43-49) seems to suggest that
Truitt and Bradlee still worked on the story after they were
shown it was wrong.

Also intriguing is a flourish added in Rosenbaum's version, which
appears heavily reliant on the Truitts and Angletons as sources.
Rosenbaum writes that Mary's diary, although usually laid upon
her bedroom bookcase, was found in a locked steel box in her
studio. Rosenbaum doesn't probe as to why it was not found in its
usary&resting place. The locked steel box is not a part of any
other version of the story I know, including Tony Bradlee's, and,
in all versions, she supposedly found the diary. Of course, a
locked box suggests intrigue, but it strains reality. Are we to
believe that every time Mary wanted to make an diary entry she
would first fumble for her keys? Even in her own bedroom while
she's living alone?

Of course, Rosenbaum makes nothing of the two most obvious
paradoxes in the entire tale. Almost everyone agrees that, while
the Meyers were married, she was knowledgeable about his CIA
activities and that Cord Meyer was close to Angleton. Reportedly,
the liberal Mary grew disenchanted with Cord, his cohorts

[Boston Blackie]

Doctrine of
Crimes under International Law as follows: Section II. CRIMES UNDER
INTERNATIONAL LAW

498. Crimes Under International Law

Any person, whether a member of the armed forces or a civilian, who
commits an act which constitutes a crime under international law is
responsible therefor and liable to punishment. Such offenses in
connection with war comprise:

1. Crimes against peace.
2. Crimes against humanity.
3. War crimes.

Although this manual recognizes the criminal responsibility of
individuals for those offenses which may comprise any of the foregoing
types of crimes, members of the armed forces will normally be concerned
only with those offenses constituting "war crimes."

499. War Crimes

The term "war crime" is the technical expression for a violation of the
law of war by any person or persons, military or civilian. Every
violation of the law of war is a war crime.

500. Conspiracy, Incitement, Attempts, and Complicity

Conspiracy, direct incitement, and attempts to commit, as well as
complicity in the commission of, crimes against peace, crimes against
humanity, and war crimes are punishable.


These prohibitions of U.S. Army Field 27-10 (1956) apply directly to
President Bush Jr. in his constitutional capacity as "Commander-in-Chief
of the A

[Kent Finnell]

Full Spectrum Dominance 108 (2003).

2. Shadia B. Drury, The Political Ideas of Leo Strauss (1988); Leo
Strauss and the American Right (1999). See also Alain Frachon & Daniel
Vernet, The Strategist and the Philosopher: Leo Strauss and Albert
Wohlstetter, Le Monde, April 16, 2003, translated into English by Norman
Madarasz on Counterpunch.org., June 2, 2003.

3. See also David Brock, Blinded by the Right (2002).

4. George E. Curry & Trevor W. Coleman, Hijacking Justice, Emerge,
October 1999, at 42; Jerry M. Landay, The Conservative Cabal That's
Transforming American Law, Washington Monthly, March 2000, at 19; People
for the American Way, The Federalist Society (August 2001); Institute
for Democracy Studies, The Federalist Society and the Challenge to a
Democratic Jurisprudence (January 2001).

5. Francis A. Boyle, Bush's Banana Republic, Counterpunch.org, Oct. 11,
2002.

6. Francis A. Boyle, Biowarfare, Terror Weapons and the U.S.: Home
Brew?, Counterpunch.org, April 25, 2002.

7. See Greg Palast, The Best Democracy Money Can Buy (2003), at 5 et
seq.

8. See Chomsky on Miseducation (Donald Macedo ed. 2000).

9. Francis A. Boyle, Take Sharon to The Hague, Counterpunch.org, June 6,
2002.

10. White House Press Release, President Discusses the Future of Iraq,
Washington Hilton Hotel, Feb. 26, 2003.

11. Nasser H. Aruri, Dishonest Broker, 193-216 (2003). See also Tanya
Reinhart, Israel/Palestine (2002); Cheryl A. Rubenberg, The Palestinians
(2003)

[Resident Samuel]

this to her?
And what on earth does that stunning adverb "again" signify? Does
this mean the government pushed her in 1977? In 1988? On both
occasions?
In retrospect, the recurring intervals of Exner's appearances are
suggestive. Although the Post surfaced her in 1975, her book did
not come out until two years later, on the fifteenth anniversary
of Kennedy's assassination. The 1988 People version - boosted by
two Times stories previewing its release - seems done to get the
jump on other stories for the 25th anniversary (as we shall see,
Ron Rosenbaum filled this role for the 20th anniversary). The
latest edition, with Exner aware of the JFK Act, was done at the
beginning of what was originally to be the last year of the
Review Board. Smith wrote the piece before the extra year was
granted by Congress. Smith's friendliness with Hersh, seems to
further this. For according to the ARRB's original timetable, the
Vanity Fair piece would arrive at the beginning of its last year
and Hersh's attack book in October, right when the Review Board
was originally set to shut down. This would make a nice pincers
movement with which to smother the Board's serious and
blockbuster work amid sexy smears about abortions and Marilyn
Monroe (Hersh).

In historical perspective, the Times and Safire, and the Post and
Ben Bradlee (who, as we shall see, also embraced Exner) opened
the flood gates to all kinds of National Enquirer type stories
about JFK's private life. Rumors about Monroe, numerous
secretaries, these all started to get tossed about. A prominent
one about to be recycled emerged just a year after Exner. It was
promulgated again by Bradlee's Post via The National Enquirer.

Mary Meyer

Mary Pinchot was the niece of that early conservationist hero
Gifford Pinchot. She married CIA officer, and Allen Dulles
protégé, Cord Meyer. Mary's sister was nam

[rob]

conspiracy to commit more
Nuremberg Crimes against Peace which are "punishable." In other words,
the official Bush Jr. Doctrine of Preventive Warfare itself constitutes
in fact and in law an on-going Nuremberg Crime against Peace in its own
right. Once again, from the perspective of international legal history,
the United States government itself is now mimicking the Nazi
government: Austria; Czechoslovakia; Poland; World War II. Versus
Serbia;42 Afghanistan; Iraq; and next North Korea, or Iran, or Syria?
Can World War III be far behind? On 18 June 2003 the Bush Jr.
administration illegally attacked and invaded but withdrew from Syria.43
There is no international legal doctrine justifying "hot pursuit" across
land borders. This was aggression pure and simple. Then on 26 August
2003 President Bush Jr. told the American Legion Convention that he was
fully prepared to launch more "pre-emptive" attacks against his chosen
enemies around the world.44 So Bush Jr. clearly sketched out on the
horizon the prospect of more acts of aggression at the very opening of
his 2004 presidential election campaign. Will Bush Jr. further exploit
aggression and warfare in order to win his very first U.S. presidential
election? Or will he steal the U.S. Presidency from the American People
as he did in 2000? Or perhaps some combination of both strategies? His
Rasputin Karl Rove will know for sure. Belligerent Occupation

When the Bush Jr. administration's aggression

[Boston Blackie]

that he references in his current book,
Alien Agenda. The memo supposedly reports on information gleaned
from an FBI wiretap of Dorothy Kilgallen's phone. The document
went from the FBI to the CIA, where it was signed by James
Angleton. In it, a man named Howard Rothberg is quoted as saying
that Monroe had conversations with the Kennedy brothers on top
secret matters like the examination of captured outer space
creatures, bases inside of Cuba, and of President Kennedy's plans
to kill Castro. He also said that she was talking about a "diary
of secrets" (quotes in original) that she had threatened RFK with
if he brushed her off. When I got this memo, I was struck by its
singular format. I have seen hundreds of CIA documents, maybe
thousands, and I never saw one that looked like this. (We can't
reproduce it because the copy sent to us is so poor). I forwarded
it to Washington researcher Peter Vea. He agreed it was highly
unusual. To play it safe, I then sent a copy to former
intelligence analyst John Newman. He said that he had seen such
reports. What he thought was wrong with it was that there were
things in it that should have been redacted that weren't and
things exposed that should have been blacked out. For instance,
there is a phrase as follows, "a secret air base for the purpose
of inspecting [things] from outer space." Newman notes that the
brackets around the word "things" denote that it had been
previously redacted. It should not have. The words

[alohacyberian]

the cinching piece of the puzzle,
would be "a reel of tape of Oswald getting briefed by Giancana"
(Anson p. 120). With what serious people have learned about
Oswald today, through work by Phil Melanson, John Newman, and
John Armstrong, this is preposterous. The Blakey-Davis whim about
the Mafia hiring a "hit man" who couldn't hit the side of a barn
and used a $12.95 bolt action rifle to do the job, went out the
window when the HSCA closed down. But "crack" reporter Hersh
still buys into it. As he does the idea that Sirhan killed Bobby
Kennedy, proven by the fact that he wrote a blurb praising Dan
Moldea's 1995 whitewash of that case.

Behind all the sordid details of these articles there is a bigger
picture to be outlined. One of the main parts of it is the
increasing ascendancy of tabloid journalism into the major media
outlets, and with it, its concomitant attachment to the lives of
celebrities. More often than not, that translates into the
endless search for sleaze and scandal. This chain on the lives of
the Kennedys has been well described in these articles. The
overall tendency has become so prevalent that, as many have
no

[alohacyberian]

maliciously strove to rehabilitate one of
the greatest international war criminals in the post-World War II era.20
Do not send your children to the University of Chicago where they will
grow up to become warmongers like Wolfowitz or totalitarians like
Ashcroft! The University of Chicago is an intellectual and moral
cesspool. A Course on Oil and Gas Law

I will not waste the reader's time here by cataloguing, reviewing, and
refuting all the factoids of the Bush Jr's pro-Israeli Straussian
Neo-Con war propaganda campaign against Iraq.21 But there were certainly
multiple reasons for this Bush Jr. war of aggression against Iraq
besides Israel. Of course there also came the Bush Family vendetta
against Iraqi President Saddam Hussein and his Family, now having rubbed
out his two sons and a teenage grandson. Having been born and raised on
the Southside of Chicago right near Al Capone's old headquarters as well
as the site of his St. Valentine's Day Massacre, I know gangsters when I
see them in operation. But at the top of the Bush Jr./Sr. hit-list was
oil and the fact that Iraq possessed about 11% of the world's oil
reserves Indeed, prior thereto it was the thirst and lust for oil and
natural gas by the American Power Elite22 that was really behind the
Bush Jr. administration's aggression against Afghanistan in order to
gain direct access to the rich oil and natural gas fields of Central
Asia, once again using the terrible tragedy of September 11th as public
justification for a pre-planned war of aggression under the pretext of
"combating international terrorism."23 According to the Bush Jr.
administration's version of events, 15 of the 19 hijackers on September
11th were from Saudi Arabia, but then for some mysterious reason America
had to attack, invade, and occupy Afghanistan. All of the Bush Jr.
apparatchiks are still lying about, dissembling over, and covering up
who ultimately was responsible for the terrible tragedy of September
11th , an

[jakdedert]

"47 The American
government started the 20th Century by stealing a colonial Empire from
Spain and then conducting a near genocidal war against the Philippino
People - "a place in the sun." The U.S. government opened the 21st
Century by trying to steal a hydrocarbon empire from the Muslim States
and Peoples of Eurasia - "a war against international terrorism." But
this latest transgression could very well prove to be the definitive
step of "imperial overstretch" that will break the back of the American
Empire both abroad and at home.48 In 1991 the mighty Soviet Empire
collapsed like a house of cards after a decade of "imperial overstretch"
in Afghanistan. Like the former Soviet Union, the United States of
America itself is an imperial house of cards built upon the backs of
Indigenous Peoples and Peoples of Color.49 The Bush Jr. administration's
aggressions against and occupations of Afghanistan and Iraq could very
well generate a reverse domino effect: ". . . they all fall down." The
United States of America is not immune to the laws of history.
Prostitution of and by the United Nations

To the same effect was Security Council Resolution 1500 of 14 August
2003, which "Welcomes the establishment of the" U.S. puppet-council in
Iraq under Chicago's pro-Israeli Straussian Neo-Con CIA asset Chalabi,
and estab

[Boston Blackie]

them, is Mary mentioned or even vaguely described.

This is improbable considering the vivid, unforgettable portrait
that Leary drew in 1983. This striking looking woman walks in
unannounced, mentions her powerful friends in Washington, and
later starts dumping out the CIA's secret operations to control
American elections to him. Leary, who mentioned many of those he
turned on throughout his books, and thanks those who believed in
him, deemed this unimportant. That is until the 20th anniversary
of JFK's death. (Which is when Rosenbaum wrote his ugly satire on
the Kennedy research community for Texas Monthly which in turn
got him a guest spot on Nightline.) This is also when Leary began
hooking up with Gordon Liddy, doing carnival-type debates across
college campuses, an act which managed to rehabilitate both of
them and put them both back in the public eye.

There is another problem with Leary's book: the Phil Graham
anecdote. In his book, Leary has Mary tell him that the cat was
out the bag as far as her and JFK were concerned. The reason was
that a well-known friend of hers had blabbed about them in
public. This is an apparent reference to Post owner Phil Graham's
outburst

[John Dey]

(1976).

64. Howard Zinn, The Future of History (1999); Michael Parenti, History
as Mystery (1999).

65. William L. Shirer, The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich (1960).


Iraq is Moot
It's not about Iraq
or weapons of mass destruction
It's about corporate empire
and America's function
in the new world order:

America on the top,
a "first among equals"
The world under our boot-
- a Pax Romana sequel
called "America first."


Or some other road less traveled
by the combat boot's sole
A shared security
A lesser role
on a road that may be harder


than one on which
we give all directions
but one where corporate interests
are tempered by dissention
and people come first.


It's not about Iraq
Saddam or the bomb
It's about McDonalds
versus the Imam
lucre or culture


Unilatateral Empire or
global democracy
"Liberating Iraq"?
Complete hypocrisy
Liberation by vulture.


On September 25, 1997, ABC used its news magazine program 20/20
to take an unusual journalistic step. In the first segment of the
program, Peter Jennings took pains to discredit documents that
had been about to be used by its own contracted reporter for an
upcoming show scheduled for broadcast. The contracted reporter
was Seymour Hersh. The documents purported to show a secret deal
involving Marilyn Monroe, Sam Giancana, and Pr

[rob]

Bush Jr. hit-list because
it had been materially and psychologically debilitated by over a decade
of genocidal economic sanctions imposed upon its people by the United
Nations Security Council acting at the behest of the United States and
the United Kingdom since 1990. Iraq and its oil fields were finally ripe
for the imperial picking by Bush Jr. and his right-hand henchman Tony
Blair. By contrast North Korea and Iran would defend themselves by
inflicting enormous casualties against an aggressor. On the Southside of
Chicago, bullies prefer to pick upon hapless victims.

The Nazi doctrine of preventive warfare was publicly articulated by
President Bush Jr. in his 1 June 2002 commencement address at the West
Point Military Academy. Then in late August of 2002, Vice President
Cheney signaled the formal commencement of the Bush Jr. war of
aggression against Iraq by giving two public speeches before the
Veterans of Foreign Wars (Aug. 26) and the Korean War Veterans (Aug. 29)
in which he publicly touted the Nazi doctrine of preventive warfare
against Iraq. Of course the lap-dog U.S. news media were too obesiant to
observe that while mongering for a war against Iraq before these former
soldiers who had actually gone to war,

[alohacyberian]

vituperativeness,
it is necessary to sketch in how they all began. In that way, the
reader will be able to see that Hersh's book, the Vanity Fair
piece on Judith Exner, and an upcoming work by John Davis on Mary
Meyer, are part of a continuum.

The Right and the Kennedys

There can be no doubt that the right hated the Kennedys and
Martin Luther King. There is also little doubt that some who
hated JFK had a role in covering up his death. One could use
Secret Service agent Elmer Moore as an example. As revealed in
Probe (Vol. 4 No. 3, pp. 20-21), Moore told one Jim Gochenaur how
he was in charge of the Dallas doctors testimony in the JFK case.

One of his assignments as liaison for the Warren Commission seems
to have been talking Dr. Malcolm Perry out of his original
statement that the throat wound was one of entry, which would
have indicated an assassin in front of Kennedy. But another thing
Gochenaur related in his Church Committee interview was the
tirade that Moore went into the longer he talked to him: how
Kennedy was a pinko who was selling us out to the communist

[rob]

is her vow to tell the whole story. Exner inherited a lot of
money from her grandmother (in the twenty year adult span of the
book, she only mentions one job of a few weeks duration). In her
early years she gravitated toward the Hollywood acting colony,
since her sister and first husband were thespians. She fell in
with the California-Malibu jet set: Dean Martin, Frank Sinatra,
Sammy Davis et. al. She says she prefers the company of men over
women and her book shows it. She is flying from one to another so
often that, at times it is hard to keep track of where she is:
Los Angeles, Palm Springs, Miami, Chicago, Washington etc. She
met JFK through Sinatra. Kennedy immediately fell for her.

According to Exner, it was not just physical. Kennedy became a
dopey mooner in her hands. He talked of leaving his wife for her.
At times the pressures of his life got so intense he wanted to
escape with her to a deserted island. Since he can't bear to lose
her, whenever there is friction in the relationship, Kennedy
pours on the charm to smooth it out. Even when Hoover confronts
him with the Exner-Giancana association, Kennedy insists on
seeing her. At one time, he asks her to board Air Force One with
him. She won't because she wants to spare Jackie's dignity.

There is one scene in the book that caps her aforementioned
personal appeal vs. JFK's. It crystallizes the Errol Flynn/Don
Juan image that Exner wishes to construct out of Kennedy. It is
used by some authors of the type we will discuss, most notably
CIA-FBI toady and New York Times-Washington Post veter

[alohacyberian]

text of a memo that he references in his current book,
Alien Agenda. The memo supposedly reports on information gleaned
from an FBI wiretap of Dorothy Kilgallen's phone. The document
went from the FBI to the CIA, where it was signed by James
Angleton. In it, a man named Howard Rothberg is quoted as saying
that Monroe had conversations with the Kennedy brothers on top
secret matters like the examination of captured outer space
creatures, bases inside of Cuba, and of President Kennedy's plans
to kill Castro. He also said that she was talking about a "diary
of secrets" (quotes in original) that she had threatened RFK with
if he brushed her off. When I got this memo, I was struck by its
singular format. I have seen hundreds of CIA documents, maybe
thousands, and I never saw one that looked like this. (We can't
reproduce it because the copy sent to us is so poor). I forwarded
it to Washington researcher Peter Vea. He agreed it was highly
unusual. To play it safe, I then sent a copy to former
intelligence analyst John Newman. He said that he

[Olin Murrell]

for limited exposure was
quite clever. The most documentation given up by the CIA was on
the Castro assassination plots. Further, the Agency decided to
give up many documents on both the employment of the Mafia to
kill Fidel, and the AM/LASH plots, that is, the enlistment of a
Cuban national close to Castro to try and kill him. Again, not
enough credit has been given to the wisdom of these choices. In
intelligence parlance, there is a familiar phrase: muddying the
waters. This means that by confusing and confounding the listener
with diverse and prolific amounts of information, the main point
becomes obfuscated. Since none of the Mafia plots succeeded, one
could claim they were ineffectual. The huge amount of publicity
garnered by them could eventually be deflected onto the Mob's
role in them and not the Agency's. The AM/LASH plots, exposed in
even more copious documentation, could be used in a similar way.

If Castro knew about these plots within his midst, couldn't he
then claim turnabout and use the same tactics by employing a
Communist in the U.S. to kill Kennedy? This, or a combination of
the two, has been what suspect writers like Jean Davison and Jack
Anderson have been foisting on the public for years.

The Establishment Takes Some Hits

The political fallout from the Church Committee was quite
intense. The CIA took quite a few hits, though it emerged intact.

Eastern Establishment-GOP mainstay Allen Dulles was implicated in
the authorization of two assassination plots (Lumumba and
Castro). Even Republican icon Dwight Eisenhower was implicated:
The chain of events revealed by the documents and testimony is
strong enough to permit a reasonable inference that the plot to
assassinate Lumumba was authorized by President Eise

[Thomas?]

concerned
only with those offenses constituting "war crimes."

499. War Crimes

The term "war crime" is the technical expression for a violation of the
law of war by any person or persons, military or civilian. Every
violation of the law of war is a war crime.

500. Conspiracy, Incitement, Attempts, and Complicity

Conspiracy, direct incitement, and attempts to commit, as well as
complicity in the commission of, crimes against peace, crimes against
humanity, and war crimes are punishable.


These prohibitions of U.S. Army Field 27-10 (1956) apply directly to
President Bush Jr. in his constitutional capacity as "Commander-in-Chief
of the Army and Navy of the United States" under Article 2, Section 2,
Clause 1 of the United States Constitution. They also apply to his
subordinates in the military chain-of-command: Vice President Cheney,
Secretary of War Rumsfeld, Deputy Secretary of War Wolfowitz, etc. So
even in accordance with the terms of U.S. Army Field Manual 27-10
itself, Bush Jr., Cheney, Rumsfeld, and Wolfowitz, inter alia, are
guilty of committing a Nuremberg Crime against Peace for their war of
aggression against Iraq in violation of the United Nations Charter and
the Kellogg-Briand Peace Pact, at a minimum. The same conclusion applies
to Secretary of State Colin Powell, National Security Adviser
Condoleezza Rice, C.I.A. Director George Tenet, the pro-Israeli Neo-Con
Straussian cabal, and other high-level Bush Jr. administration officials
dealing with foreign affairs, "defense" and "intelligence," who plotted,
planned, conspired, promoted, incited, as well as aided and abetted this
criminal war against Iraq. U.S.

[alohacyberian]

23rd notice stated that Hersh's book would focus on the
Kennedys and Monroe and how RFK had Monroe killed.

As everyone knows by now, the whole Monroe angle blew up in
Hersh's face. When Hersh had to reluctantly admit on ABC that he
had been had, he did it on the same spot where Rivers, Summers,
and Sylvia Chase had played martyrs for the tabloid cause, namely
20/20. On September 25th, Peter Jennings narrated the opening
segment of that program. With what we know in November, Jennings
approach reveals much by what was left out. Hersh appeared only
briefly on the segment. He was on screen less than 10% of the
time. The main focus was on the forensic debunking of the
documents (which we now know was underplayed by ABC.) Jennings
cornered Lex Cusack, the man who "found" the papers in the files
of his late father who was an attorney. From published accounts,
the documents were supposedly signed by five people: JFK, RFK,
Monroe, Janet DesRosiers (Joe Kennedy's assistant) and Aaron
Frosch (Monroe's lawyer). They outline a settlement agreement
between JFK and Monroe signed at the Carlyle Hotel in New York on
March 3, 1960. The documents set up a $600,000 trust to be paid
by contributions from the individual Kennedy family members to
Monroe's mother, Gladys Baker. In return for this, Monroe agrees
to keep quiet about her relationship with JFK and any underworld
personalities she observed in Kennedy's presence. The latter is
specified as being Sam Giancana. Kennedy had a lawyer out of his
usual orbit, Larry Cusack of New York, do the preparation.

Just from the above, one could see there were certain problems
with the story. First, its details could have been culled from
reading the pulp fiction in the Monroe field: the idea that JFK
had a long, ongoing affair with Monroe; that she had threate

[alohacyberian]

the
idea fell through. But by that time, Hersh had hooked up with an
old pal, Michael Ewing. Hersh then decided that a book on the
Kennedys-not necessarily the assassination- would bring him the
big money that he craved. Through big-time talent agency ICM, the
project was sold to Little, Brown for the Bob Woodward type of
money that Hersh was so envious of: a cool million.

Although Ewing appears to have been a major source for Hersh,
Anson misses his true significance. Ewing was one of the people
brought into the House Select Committee by Bob Blakey after Dick
Sprague was forced out. Ewing has never complained in public
about the failures of that inquest. There is a reason for this:
he is a Blakey acolyte. Blakey liked him so much that he gave him
a key assignment in 1978: close down the New Orleans
investigation. The HSCA had found too much corroborating evidence
supporting Jim Garrison's allegations about certain people
involved with Oswald in the summer of 1963. One of these
witnesses de

[Thomas?]

to the elite: JFK was never in the CFR (Imperial
Brain Trust p. 247); Bobby Kennedy hated the Rockefellers (Thy
Will be Done pp. 538-542). For those sins, and encouraging others
to follow them, they must suffer the fate of the Undead. And
Marilyn Monroe must be thrown into that half-world with them. At
the hands of Bob Loomis' pal, that "liberal" crusader Sy Hersh.

As Anson says, he must just want the money.


Current events, most notably a past issue of Vanity Fair, and the
upcoming release of Sy Hersh's new book, extend an issue that I
have dealt with in a talk I have done several times around the
country in the last two years. It is entitled "The Two
Assassinations of John Kennedy." I call it that because there has
been an ongoing campaign of character assassination ever since
Kennedy was killed.

In the talk to date, I've dealt primarily with the attacks on
Kennedy from the left by Noam Chomsky and his henchman Alexander
Cockburn which occurred at the time of the release of Oliver
Stone's JFK. But historically speaking, the attacks on the
Kennedys, both Jack and Robert, have not come predominantly from
the left. The attacks from the right have been much more
numerous. And the attacks from that direction were always harsher
and more personal in tone. As we shall see, that personal tone
knows no l

[Olin Murrell]

so envious of: a cool million.

Although Ewing appears to have been a major source for Hersh,
Anson misses his true significance. Ewing was one of the people
brought into the House Select Committee by Bob Blakey after Dick
Sprague was forced out. Ewing has never complained in public
about the failures of that inquest. There is a reason for this:
he is a Blakey acolyte. Blakey liked him so much that he gave him
a key assignment in 1978: close down the New Orleans
investigation. The HSCA had found too much corroborating evidence
supporting Jim Garrison's allegations about certain people
involved with Oswald in the summer of 1963. One of these
witnesses described elements of a conspiracy in New Orleans which
included David Ferrie and Clay Shaw. He also said that Shaw knew
Ruby. He then passed a polygraph with flying colors. That was
enough for Blakey. He switched investigating teams. Some of the
people Blakey brought in knew nothing about New Orleans: they
were actually pulled off the Martin Luther King side of the HSCA.
The man brought in to actually bury Garrison was Ewing. Two of
the people Ewing consulted with before dismissing Garrison were
Bill Gurvich and Aaron Kohn, two men strongly connected to the
FBI and whose credibility on Garrison is quite suspect.

At the beginning of his project, Hersh declared that Ewing had
"an I.Q. of about 800 and government documents coming out of his
ears." (Anson p. 120) It is questionable whether Hersh was ever
going to do a book about the Kennedy murder. But if he was, Ewing
wo

[alohacyberian]

against Iraq
in the first place. America for the Americans Otherwise, U.S., U.K. and
foreign military occupation forces will be facing another type of
Vietnam War situation. Iraq could readily become a combination of Tonkin
Gulf, L.B.J., Vietnam, Nixon, Cambodia, Watergate, and Impeachment63 all
over again, rolled into one, and accelerated. History repeating itself
as both a tragedy and a farce.64 Only this time the American Peace
Movement is ready. We have seen this elitist "game" of Machiavellian
Power Politics before. Once again, it is up to the common sense and
decency of the American People to stop it. Our alternative is an
American Empire in Eurasia and an American Police State at home. The
Thousand Year Nazi Reich was purportedly defending its "homeland" too.65


Notes

1. See, e.g., Rahul Mahajan, Full Spectrum Dominance 108 (2003).

2. Shadia B. Drury, The Political Ideas of Leo Strauss (1988); Leo
Strauss and the American Right (1999). See also Alain Frachon & Daniel
Vernet, The Strategist and the Philosopher: Leo Strauss and A

[rob]

oil
and Israel, which was in violation of the United Nations Charter and the
Kellogg-Briand Peace Pact as well as the Nuremberg Charter, Judgment and
Principles - a Crime against Peace. Iraq should immediately be placed
under the direct control and supervision of a United Nations Trusteeship
under Chapter XII of the U.N. Charter. A real and independent United
Nations Peacekeeping Force should be deployed to Iraq under the auspices
of the U.N. General Assembly (not the U.S. co-opted U.N. Security
Council) pursuant to its powers under the Uniting for Peace Resolution
(1950). The U.S. and U.K. aggressor military occupation forces should be
removed immediately from Iraq. This is exactly what happened in the 1956
Middle East "war" when the U.N. General Assembly deployed the United
Nations Emergency Force (UNEF) to the Sinai in order to facilitate the
withdrawal of aggressor military forces by the United Kingdom, France
and Israel that had illegally attacked and invaded Egypt in their joint
and severable Nuremberg Crime against Peace for the purpose of
inflicting "regime change" against Egyptian President Nasser.62

The Bush Jr. pro-consul in Iraq Paul Bremer and his Iraqi puppet council
under the pro-Israeli Chicago Straussian Neo-Con CIA asset Chalabi
should be replaced by a U.N. Transitional Authority reporting